Mike Johnson calls War Powers Act "unconstitutional"
Why it matters: Johnson's (R-La.) comments are his strongest signal yet that he's against an effort to use the law to assert Congress' authority to rein in the president's use of military force.
"Many respected constitutional experts argue that the War Powers Act is itself unconstitutional," Johnson told reporters Tuesday.
He added: "I'm persuaded by that argument. They think it's a violation of the Article 2 powers of the commander in chief. I think that's right."
Driving the news: Rep. Thomas Massie (Ky.) — the lone GOP sponsor of a resolution to limit Trump's ability to escalate in Iran — indicated he would back off his push to force a vote after Trump announced Monday that Israel and Iran had agreed to a ceasefire.
But congressional Democrats are still forging ahead in an effort to send a broader message about Congress' authority to declare war.
A vote on Sen. Tim Kaine's (D-Va.) war powers resolution could happen as soon as Wednesday, although a decision to delay a planned Tuesday afternoon Iran briefing could affect timing.
Catch up quick: Johnson and many other Republicans have insisted that Trump had the authority to take action against Iran — and dismissed lawmakers who have demanded that Trump seek congressional approval.
"The strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities were clearly within President Trump's Article 2 powers as commander in chief. It shouldn't even be a dispute," Johnson said Tuesday.
The other side: Democrats, and some Republicans, have argued the president violated the Constitution when he carried out strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities without Congress' explicit authority.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
6 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Texas lawmakers approve redistricting map favouring Republicans
Texas legislators have approved new congressional maps designed to give Republicans an edge in next year's elections for the US House of Representatives. After a two-week standoff, where Democrats fled the state to stall the vote and rally supporters against the redistricting plans, Republicans in the Texas House of Representatives passed the new voting lines in an 88-52 vote. The maps will now go to the Texas Senate, where they are expected to be swiftly approved. They create five new Republican-leaning seats that would shore up the party's US House majority in Washington DC. Democratic-led states are pushing to redraw their own maps to offset the Texas ones. President Donald Trump backed redrawing the maps to safeguard a Republican majority in the US House. Republicans hold a slim majority in the upper chamber of Congress, which Democrats aim to win back in the 2026 midterm elections. Wednesday's vote in Texas followed a dramatic showdown as Democrats fled across state lines to deny Republicans the quorum necessary in the state legislative body to take a vote. Texas Governor Greg Abbott, a Republican, ordered their absent Democrats' arrest, and some of them said law enforcement had monitored their homes while they were gone. The lawmakers returned this week, saying they had achieved their objective of drawing national attention to the matter. In an effort to ensure Democrats would not attempt to halt the vote again, Texas House Speaker Dustin Burrows ordered the statehouse chamber doors to be locked on Monday. He also said Democrats would be "released into the custody" of a designated police officer to ensure they returned to the statehouse on Wednesday for the redistricting vote. Several Democrats instead ripped up the written agreements that they were required to sign for the police escort. One lawmaker, Nicole Collier, decided to sleep in the chamber rather than be escorted by an officer. In the time since Texas started planning these new voting maps, other states controlled by both political parties - including Florida, New York, Ohio and Missouri - have been weighing similar changes. California lawmakers are currently debating new maps that would give new advantages to Democrats in five districts, which would cancel out changes made in Texas. A key provision in California says the maps would only go into effect if Texas or other states went ahead with changes favouring Republicans. After the vote on Wednesday, California Governor Gavin Newsom wrote on X: "It's on, Texas." The new maps in Texas sparked uproar over gerrymandering - the redrawing of electoral boundaries to favour a political party - which is practised by both main parties and is legal unless ruled to be racially motivated. Like other states, Texas typically redraws congressional districts once a decade when new population data is released by the US Census. Texas Democrats claimed that redrawing the maps before the next population count in 2030 was being done along racial lines - an argument that has been rejected by Republicans. Voting maps that were approved in 2021 after the last population count are still being litigated over claims of racial discrimination. During one of the many heated exchanges during debate in the Texas statehouse, Republican legislator Todd Hunter, who introduced the redistricting bill, was applauded as he scolded Democrats. "Don't come into this body and say we didn't include you," he said. "You left us for 18 days, and that's wrong." Democrats in the chamber questioned the legality of the maps and accused Republicans of trying to "steal" an election. "Let's talk about cowardice and cheats," Democratic legislator Ann Johnson said. "The root of all of this is around racism and power," she added. "A pure power grab." Democrats and civil rights groups have said the new maps will dilute voting power from minorities, which would violate federal law, and have threatened to sue. Texas Democrats return home after redistricting row California governor unveils voting lines plan to counter Texas Republicans Texas redistricting feud escalates as Democrats face bomb and FBI threats
The Hill
7 minutes ago
- The Hill
Work begins in Finland on a new Canadian icebreaker for Arctic defense
HELSINKI, Finland (AP) — Dignitaries at a steel-cutting ceremony Wednesday in Finland marked the start of work on a new Canadian icebreaker to be named the Polar Max and aimed at bolstering Arctic defense. The event marked the concrete beginning of a trilateral partnership of the United States, Canada and Finland announced by the White House in July 2024 to bolster defenses in a region where Russia has been increasingly active. Russia has vastly more icebreaker ships than the U.S. and Canada at a time when climate change has made the remote but strategically important Arctic more accessible. The Icebreaker Collaboration Effort, or ICE Pact, aims to leverage Finland's advanced shipbuilding expertise and technologies to help meet U.S. and Canadian demand for new icebreakers. Canada's minister for defense procurement, Stephen Fuhr, said his country is bringing its coast guard into the military and that investing in the Arctic is important for the future. 'The North is opening up, there are many reasons to be up there,' Fuhr said. 'There's security issues, resource development.' The hull will be built at Helsinki Shipyard before being transported to Canada where it's expected to be completed in Levis, Quebec by 2030. Quebec's Economy Minister Christopher Skeete highlighted the benefits of cooperating on the building of the new icebreaker. 'It's a partnership and we have a shared responsibility for the North, so this is a unique and very opportune partnership that allows us to leverage the strengths of both our countries in terms of maritime Arctic protection,' he said. 'The North is becoming more and more accessible, there are more and more rivalries in the North, and so we have to be prepared to assert our sovereignty out there,' Skeete added. During a NATO summit in June, U.S. President Donald Trump said Finland was the 'king of icebreakers' and suggested the U.S. might be willing to buy as many as 15 of them, including the used icebreaker that Trump said might be immediately available. 'We're trying to make a good deal,' Trump said. According to a U.S. Government Accountability Office report, the U.S. hasn't built a heavy polar icebreaker in almost 50 years. The last remaining one in service is the 399-foot Coast Guard Cutter Polar Star commissioned in 1976. During a talk in February at the RAND research organization, U.S. Coast Guard Vice Admiral Peter Gautier said the agency has determined it needs eight to nine icebreakers — a mix of heavy polar security cutters and medium Arctic security cutters. Building an icebreaker can be challenging because it has to be able to withstand the brutal crashing through ice that can be as thick as 21 feet (6.4 meters) and wildly varying sea and air temperatures, the report said.
NBC News
9 minutes ago
- NBC News
Texas House passes new congressional maps
The Texas House has approved new GOP-drawn maps that could give Republicans up to five more seats in Congress, despite Democrats' efforts to block the plan.
