Big argument I'm seeing now is on authorities.
Some people are suggesting that POTUS is in violation of the NDAA SEC. 1229 "PROHIBITION OF UNAUTHORIZED MILITARY FORCE IN OR AGAINST IRAN."
Although if you take a look at SEC. 1229(c)(2)
I think the exceptions consistent with the War Power Resolutions sec (2)(c)(2) &(3).
Statutory authorization in this sense is both the 2001 and 2002 AUMFs.
You can see how the WH has interpreted the AUMFs in a congressional correspondence
here in that they don't view the AUMF as authorizing military force against Iran, except as may be necessary to defend the U.S. or partner forces engaged in counterterrorism operations or operations to establish a stable, democratic Iraq.
I'd probably suggest that as an attempt for barracks lawyer. How it squares with the NDAA, and whether or not it was prudent even if technically or tenuously authorized, are different questions.