U.S. Democrats introduce resolution to rein in Trump's use of military in Iran
Trump's Republican Party holds a majority in both the House of Representatives and the Senate and it is unlikely any resolution restricting Trump's actions could pass both chambers.
Iran targeted a U.S. base in Qatar on Monday in retaliation. The Israel-Iran war, which began on June 13 when Israel attacked its regional rival, further raised tensions in a region already on edge since the start of Israel's war in Gaza in October 2023.
The joint statement issued late on Monday by Democratic U.S. Representatives Jim Himes, Gregory Meeks and Adam Smith came hours after Trump claimed on social media Israel and Iran had agreed to a ceasefire.
'President Trump must not be allowed to start a war with Iran, or any country, without Congressional approval,' the lawmakers said, adding that Trump ordered the strikes 'without meaningful consultation or Congressional authorization.'
Opinion: U.S. bombing raid on Iran raises countless questions despite apparent ceasefire
Analysis: Donald Trump's claim that Iran's nuclear sites were 'obliterated' seems stretched
Some Democratic and Republican lawmakers had called on Congress to rein in Trump's use of military force in Iran and prevent U.S. involvement in the conflict. Many Democratic U.S. lawmakers said Trump's actions were unconstitutional and that it was Congress that had the power to declare war on foreign countries.
House Speaker Mike Johnson said earlier on Monday it was not the time to consider a war powers resolution.
Trump's allies insist he had the authority to take unilateral action against Iran to eliminate what they called a potential nuclear threat posed by Tehran.
The Democratic lawmakers said Trump's actions appeared broader.
'The president has posted on social media about regime change, undermining any claim that this was a narrowly tailored operation to eliminate a nuclear threat,' the Democratic lawmakers said, referring to a Sunday post in which Trump raised the prospect of overthrowing Iran's government.
'No thoughtful deliberation nor careful planning occurred here - and serious actions demand serious debate, not presidential impulse,' they added.
Israel is the only country in the Middle East widely believed to have nuclear weapons and says its war against Iran aims to prevent Tehran from developing its own nuclear weapons.
Iran, which says its nuclear program is peaceful, is a party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty while Israel is not.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
National Post
25 minutes ago
- National Post
Trump jokes if the U.S. was at war he could stay on as president like Zelenskyy
As Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy answered a question about the difficulty of holding an election during Ukraine's war with Russia, U.S. President Donald Trump appeared to jokingly hypothesize how a similar circumstance could allow him to stay in power in the U.S. past the expiration of his current term. Article content The two met Monday at the White House to discuss ending the Ukraine-Russia war, along with other European leaders. It comes after Trump met with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Article content Article content Article content Article content 'During the war you can't have elections. So let me just see. Three and a half years from now… So you mean if we happen to be in a war with somebody, no more elections?' said Trump. Article content Article content Zelenskyy noted the difficulties of being able to hold elections during wartime, saying that a 'truce' would be needed to do so safely. Article content 'We can do security,' Zelenskyy said. 'We need … a truce, yes, everywhere — the battlefield, the sky and the sea, to make it possible for people to do democratic open legal elections.' The two leaders expressed hope that Monday's critical talks with Ukrainian and European leaders at the White House could lead to trilateral talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin to bring an end to Russia's war on Ukraine. Article content Monday's hastily assembled meeting comes after Trump met with Putin and has said that the onus is now on Zelenskyy to agree to concessions that he said could end the war. It was rounded out with more smiles and pleasantries between the two leaders, as well as agreement on some points regarding the ongoing war. Both men largely sat with their hands clasped in their laps, affably fielding questions from reporters. Article content It was much different than an exchange between Trump and Zelenskyy in February, during which Trump and Vice President JD Vance blasted Zelenskyy as 'disrespectful' and warned about future American support. Article content
CTV News
an hour ago
- CTV News
Texas Democrats return to the state as GOP pushes ahead with redistricting
(CNN) — Texas House Democrats who fled their state to stall a Republican redistricting effort returned on Monday, ending their 15-day holdout. While Democrats have vowed to keep fighting, their return allows the House to establish a two-thirds quorum necessary to advance new congressional maps in a push backed by President Donald Trump. House Speaker Dustin Burrows gaveled the House into session shortly after noon central time on Monday. He said the Democrats who'd fled the state would be 'released into the custody' of a designated Department of Public Safety officer who will ensure their return when the House reconvenes Wednesday morning. 'We are done waiting. We have a quorum. Now is the time for action. We will move quickly and the schedule will be demanding until our work is complete,' Burrows said. Now that Democrats have returned to the Texas Capitol in Austin, the GOP-dominated legislature is expected to quickly advance new congressional maps aimed at creating five more Republican-leaning seats ahead of next year's midterm elections. Democrats had fled to blue states — including Illinois, New York and Massachusetts — as they faced civil arrest warrants pushed by GOP officials in Texas to force them back into the House chamber. 'We killed the corrupt special session, withstood unprecedented surveillance and intimidation, and rallied Democrats nationwide to join this existential fight for fair representation — reshaping the entire 2026 landscape,' said state Rep. Gene Wu, who leads Democrats in the Texas House. 'We're returning to Texas more dangerous to Republicans' plans than when we left. Our return allows us to build the legal record necessary to defeat this racist map in court, take our message to communities across the state and country, and inspire legislators across the country how to fight these undemocratic redistricting schemes in their own statehouses.' Burrows told members that the House 'has been through a tumultuous two weeks,' but said it will 'remain a chamber where the majority has a right to prevail and the minority has the right to be heard.' At President Donald Trump's urging, Gov. Greg Abbott and Republicans who control the state House and Senate launched the effort to redraw the state's congressional districts mid-decade — a break from most states' typical practice of redistricting once a decade, after the completion of the U.S. Census. It's part of the party's effort to hold onto its narrow House majority in next year's midterm elections — one that also includes lobbying GOP officials in Indiana and Missouri to change their maps to turn Democratic-held seats into favorable ground for Republicans, and could see the party add more GOP-leaning seats in Ohio, which is required by state law to redistrict. The Texas effort has set off a nationwide gerrymandering arms race. In California, Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom has vowed retribution, proposing a measure that would trigger new maps that could help Democrats pick up five more seats in the state — but only if Texas moves forward with its redistricting plan. Texas House Democrats had laid out two conditions to return to the state. California would have to introduce its proposed new maps to neutralize the Texas effort, they said, and Burrows would have to adjourn the first special session Abbott had called. Both of those conditions were met on Friday. Abbott called a second special session, which began immediately after the adjournment of the first one. But the House was blocked from doing business until enough Democrats returned to the chamber to provide the quorum required under its rules. This week marks a flashpoint in an escalating and unprecedented fight over redistricting, with the country's two most populous states taking centre stage and control of the U.S. House during the second half of Trump's term potentially at stake. California Democratic lawmakers could take just three days to advance new congressional maps intended to offset Republican redistricting efforts in Texas. Legislation asking voters to approve the new maps is expected to be introduced Monday when lawmakers return to Sacramento from their summer recess, with final passage as early as Thursday, according to a person familiar with the Democratic planning. It will be heard in several committees along the way. In pushing Texas and other states to redraw their congressional lines mid-decade, Republicans have undertaken extraordinary efforts to preserve their unified hold on power in Washington, prompting Democrats to consider equally unorthodox countermeasures. Why are Texas House Democrats returning now? Texas House Democrats have said they plan to fight the redistricting bill on the floor, laying out their case against the measure ahead of expected legal challenges in the coming months. They argue they brought national attention to the GOP-led redistricting in Texas and helped create the momentum for California's counteroffensive and calls in New York and other Democratic-led states to redraw their maps. But their options to stop Republicans were always limited, short of staying out of Texas for the next year-plus. Republican Gov. Greg Abbott vowed that he would keep calling special sessions until the new maps passed. Once a quorum is met, the legislative process to approve the congressional maps will kick off, including consideration in the redistricting committee and debate and votes on the floor. The state Senate, which passed a redistricting bill in the first special session, will go through a similar process. The Senate's redistricting committee approved the map on Sunday night after holding a public hearing on the issue. The GOP's proposal would create five new districts friendlier to Trump and Republicans ahead of the midterm elections. It would likely force Democratic U.S. Reps. Greg Casar and Lloyd Doggett to run against each other in a redrawn district. GOP leaders have not laid out a timeline for final passage of the new map, but it could come as soon as this week. What's the situation in California? When California lawmakers return from their summer recess on Monday, Democrats there will take the first step toward redrawing congressional boundaries to give them a greater chance at winning five additional seats — an extraordinary move intended to counteract Texas' mid-decade redistricting. Unlike in Texas, the legislation under consideration will also require voter approval to override a constitutionally mandated independent redistricting commission. Lawmakers will have to move quickly; the California secretary of state's office gave the legislature a Friday deadline to make the November ballot, and bills must be in print for 72 hours before they can be voted on. Democrats are expected to formally introduce the legislation Monday, with final passage pegged for Thursday. Because lawmakers are proposing to change the state constitution, two-thirds of each chamber must vote in favour of it to pass. Democrats hold three-quarters of the seats in both chambers. The State Assembly returns at 1 p.m. PT (4 p.m. ET). The State Senate reconvenes an hour later. California legislators will consider three bills this week. One is the constitutional amendment, which would temporarily instate the proposed map for the 2026, 2028 and 2030 elections. It would only take effect if another state chooses to redraw its maps and it would return the commission's power after the 2030 election. The second bill describes the proposed map, while the third calls the special election, provides for state funding and makes various timing and administrative changes to accommodate the vote and the potential for new districts. The constitutional amendment requires a two-thirds vote in each chamber but doesn't need Newsom's signature before going before voters. The other two bills will need the governor's signature and, in order to take effect immediately, will also require two-thirds majorities. Can California Republicans stop Democrats in their state? California Republicans, who have little power in Sacramento to slow the redistricting push, are nevertheless closely monitoring how Democrats proceed. GOP lawmakers are anticipating Democrats will put forward a package of legislative proposals that will not only advance the new maps but also outline how they intend to hold and pay for a statewide election in less than three months, a person close to the Republican caucus told CNN. Gov. Gavin Newsom, a likely contender for the Democrats' presidential 2028 nomination, is already planning for a statewide campaign to support a referendum. A victory could help Democrats win back the U.S. House next year and give Newsom a boost in the next presidential primary. But some significant opposition to the proposed referendum is already forming. Former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger on Friday posted a picture of himself working out while wearing a T-shirt that said 'F*** the politicians/Terminate gerrymandering.' The caption read: 'I'm getting ready for the gerrymandering battle.' Charles Munger Jr., the son of the late Berkshire Hathaway vice chairman, has signaled he intends to fight the Democratic-led initiative. Munger spent more than US$12 million in 2010 to entrench the independent redistricting commission in the state constitution, and he will fight any efforts to circumvent it, his spokeswoman Amy Thoma Tan said in a statement responding to California Democrats on Thursday. 'Two wrongs do not make a right, and California shouldn't stoop to the same tactics as Texas,' Thoma Tan said. 'Instead, we should push other states to adopt our independent, non-partisan commission model across the country. That's how we can protect and defend democracy.' Newsom's approach has also led to a divide among good government groups that have traditionally opposed gerrymandering. While the League of Women Voters continues to urge California lawmakers to reject the redistricting push, leaders at Common Cause have said they will not proactively reject 'counterbalancing' efforts done in response to other states. The group said Wednesday it would not oppose redistricting pushes that are proportional responses to other states, involve public participation and have a set expiration date, among other criteria. Leaders at the organization said they would determine whether to oppose the California push after the full proposal has been released and judged against its rubric. 'We welcome the governor to adopt our fairness criteria,' said Omar Noureldin, the organization's senior vice president of policy and litigation strategy. 'And if the maps that are proposed in the process that's laid out in its totality meet that fairness criteria, then we won't oppose it.'
CTV News
an hour ago
- CTV News
Judge weighs detainees' legal rights at ‘Alligator Alcatraz' in Florida Everglades
MIAMI — A federal judge on Monday considered whether detainees at a temporary immigrant detention centre in the Florida Everglades have been denied their legal rights. In the second of two lawsuits challenging practices at the facility known as 'Alligator Alcatraz,' civil rights attorneys sought a preliminary injunction to ensure that detainees at the facility have confidential access to their lawyers, which they say hasn't happened. Florida officials dispute that claim. The civil rights attorneys also wanted U.S. District Judge Rodolfo Ruiz to identify an immigration court that has jurisdiction over the detention centre so that petitions can be filed for the detainees' bond or release. The attorneys say that hearings for their cases have been routinely cancelled in federal Florida immigration courts by judges who say they don't have jurisdiction over the detainees held in the Everglades. At the start of Monday's hearing, government attorneys said they would designate the immigration court at the Krome North Service Processing Center in the Miami area as having jurisdiction over the detention centre in the Everglades in an effort to address some of the civil rights attorneys' constitutional concerns. The judge told the government attorneys that he didn't expect them to change that designation without good reason. But before delving into the core issues of the detainees' rights, Ruiz wanted to hear about whether the lawsuit was filed in the proper jurisdiction in Miami. The state and federal government defendants have argued that even though the isolated airstrip where the facility was built is owned by Miami-Dade County, Florida's southern district is the wrong venue since the detention centre is located in neighbouring Collier County, which is in the state's middle district. The hearing ended without the judge making an immediate ruling. Ruiz suggested that the case against the federal defendants might be appropriate for the southern district because a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement office in Miami is responsible for oversight of the detention centre under an agreement between the state and federal governments. But Ruiz also questioned whether the case against the state defendants might be better in the middle district, because all of the purported civil rights violations occurred at the facility itself, which is located in Collier County, several miles outside the southern district. All parties have agreed that if the complaints against the state are moved to another venue, then the complaints against the federal government should be moved as well. The hearing over legal access comes as another federal judge in Miami considers whether construction and operations at the facility should be halted indefinitely because federal environmental rules weren't followed. U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williams on Aug. 7 ordered a 14-day halt on additional construction at the site while witnesses testified at a hearing that wrapped up last week. She has said she plans to issue a ruling before the order expires later this week. Meanwhile, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis announced last week that his administration was preparing to open a second immigration detention facility dubbed 'Deportation Depot' at a state prison in north Florida. DeSantis justified building the second detention centre by saying U.S. President Donald Trump's administration needs the additional capacity to hold and deport more immigrants. The state of Florida has disputed claims that 'Alligator Alcatraz' detainees have been unable to meet with their attorneys. The state's lawyers said that since July 15, when videoconferencing started at the facility, the state has granted every request for a detainee to meet with an attorney, and in-person meetings started July 28. The first detainees arrived at the beginning of July. But the civil rights attorneys said that even if lawyers have been scheduled to meet with their clients at the detention centre, it hasn't been in private or confidential, and it is more restrictive than at other immigration detention facilities. They said scheduling delays and an unreasonable advanced notice requirement have hindered their ability to meet with the detainees, thereby violating their constitutional rights. Civil rights attorneys said officers are going cell-to-cell to pressure detainees into signing voluntary removal orders before they're allowed to consult their attorneys, and some detainees have been deported even though they didn't have final removal orders. Along with the spread of a respiratory infection and rainwater flooding their tents, the circumstances have fuelled a feeling of desperation among detainees, the attorneys wrote in a court filing. The judge promised a quick decision. ___ David Fischer And Mike Schneider, The Associated Press
