Latest news with #WarPowers
The Hill
30-06-2025
- Politics
- The Hill
Will Congress ever stand up to the president on war powers?
Shout! Let us loudly praise two congressmen from opposite ends of the American political divide. Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) and Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) introduced a resolution to prohibit the president from using military force against Iran without congressional approval. Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) introduced a companion resolution in the Senate, which was blocked, largely on party lines, on Friday. The three are standing tall, but they are also standing alone. Not a single House Republican joined Massie in defending the Constitution. Khanna brought along a few Democrats, including progressive star Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), to defend the nation's founding document, its cornerstone, which says that only Congress has the authority to start a war. 'The Constitution,' Massie shouted to covered ears in the cowering Congress, 'does not permit the executive branch to unilaterally commit an act of war against a sovereign nation that hasn't attacked the United States. Congress has the sole power to declare war against Iran. The ongoing war between Israel and Iran is not our war. Even if it were, Congress must decide such matters, according to our Constitution.' And here is Khanna with a similarly lonely shout in the night, voicing the same truth to his caucus of congressional Democrats: 'The American people do not want to be dragged into another disastrous conflict in the Middle East. I'm proud to lead this bipartisan War Powers Resolution with Rep. Massie to reassert that any military action against Iran must be authorized by Congress.' Khanna and Massie are having an even harder time being heard after Trump's bombing of Iran generated little damage to U.S. forces. The absence of immediate fallout gave cover to a sea of members of Congress with eyes closed and mouths shut. Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) — a constitutional lawyer by training — won't even bring the resolution to a vote. He is degrading the standing of the legislature as an equal branch of government that is able to counter oversteps by the executive branch or judiciary. The same goes for Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.), who had once been seen — by myself and others — as someone with respect for his branch's constitutional standing as an independent force in government, designed with regional and party diversity, to best reflect the will of the American people. Johnson and Thune look to be ducking their responsibility on starting wars out of fear of being bullied by the president. That is a rational fear. Trump is the dominant figure in the GOP. He is calling for Massie to be primaried over his opposition to the 'big, beautiful bill,' and a Kentucky MAGA PAC is reportedly forming to fulfill the president's wish and take out Massie. Trump attacked Massie on social media: 'Massie is weak, ineffective, and votes 'NO' on virtually everything put before him … MAGA should drop this pathetic LOSER, Tom Massie, like the plague! The good news is that we will have a wonderful American Patriot running against him in the Republican Primary, and I'll be out in Kentucky campaigning really hard.' Some of the Trump loyalists now condemning Massie once had long knives out for congressional critics of the Bush administration's 2002 decision to go to war in Iraq. They called them 'unpatriotic.' But the Constitution makes clear in Article I that Congress — not the president — holds the power to declare war. Yet the U.S. has not fought a congressionally declared war since World War II. Presidents have relied on politically convenient 'authorizations' and 'resolutions' as legal fig leaves ever since. To be fair, no president has recognized the legitimacy of the War Powers Act since it was passed in 1973. The Supreme Court has not spoken. And Trump has shown a particularly brazen disregard for all constitutional limits, so it's no surprise that he'd blow past this one, too. What is surprising — and shameful — is how long members of both parties in Congress have tolerated this erosion of their own authority. President George W. Bush and a Republican Congress took the nation to war in Iraq with false claims about weapons of mass destruction. The cost? Thousands of American lives, tens of thousands of innocent Iraqi deaths and trillions of dollars wasted — some outright stolen. It also left the public with good reason to doubt a president taking military action without congressional debate. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.), a vocal Trump supporter, posted, 'It feels like a complete bait and switch to please the neocons, warmongers, military industrial complex contracts, and neocon TV personalities that MAGA hates and who were 'NEVER TRUMPERS!'' Last Thursday, 75 American organizations involved with foreign policy and human rights issued a letter calling for a congressional vote on going to war. Even some of Trump's most devoted cheerleaders are not buying the case for unilateral action. Former cable talk show host Tucker Carlson and former Trump White House aide Steve Bannon have voiced strong opposition to intervention in Iran. H.L. Mencken, the renowned newspaperman, famously wrote, 'All men are frauds. The only difference between them is that some admit it. I myself deny it.' When it comes to backing the start of a war, most everyone in Washington for the last 50 years has been a fraud. Only a principled few — like Massie, Khanna and Kaine — have earned the right to deny it. Juan Williams is senior political analyst for Fox News Channel and a prize-winning civil rights historian. He is the author of the new book 'New Prize for These Eyes: The Rise of America's Second Civil Rights Movement.'
Yahoo
28-06-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Senate fails to advance Iran War Powers resolution
The Senate on Friday rejected a Democrat-pushed resolution that aimed to rein in the president's ability to use military action against Iran without congressional approval. Sen. Tim Kaine, a Virginia Democrat, originally introduced the resolution last week, under the War Powers Act of 1973, before President Donald Trump authorized US strikes on three Iranian nuclear facilities. The resolution would have required congressional approval for any further strikes on Iran that are not in self-defense or due to imminent danger. 'I think the events of this week have demonstrated that war is too big to be consigned to the decision of any one person,' Kaine said on the Senate floor on Friday. 'War is too big an issue to leave to the moods and the whims and the daily vibes of any one person.' Lawmakers voted against advancing it to the Senate floor, 53-47. GOP Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky voted with Democrats to advance the resolution. Democratic Sen. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania voted against it. Friday's vote was a notable departure from a similar war powers vote in 2020 related to Iran, in which eight Republicans voted with Democrats, seven of whom are still in the Senate. GOP Sen. Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, one of those who had voted for the 2020 resolution and is now up for reelection, wrote on X Thursday, 'I'll be voting with Republicans against the war power resolution. When we're talking about nuclear weapons, the president should have the discretion he needs to act.' Indiana Sen. Todd Young, who also joined Democrats to back the resolution five years ago, said in his own post, 'Based on President Trump's stated goal of no further military action against Iran and conversations with senior national security officials regarding the Administration's future intentions, I do not believe an Iran war powers resolution is necessary at this time.' Sen. Susan Collins of Maine added, 'I continue to believe that Congress has an important responsibility to authorize the sustained use of military force. That is not the situation we are facing now. The President has the authority to defend our nation and our troops around the world against the threat of attack.' Paul declared he would back the resolution in a speech on the floor, in which he insisted Congress assert its constitutional authority. 'If we are to ask our young men and women to fight, and potentially give their lives, then we in this body can at least muster the courage to debate if American military intervention is warranted,' he said. 'Abdicating our constitutional responsibility by allowing the executive branch to unilaterally introduce US troops into wars is an affront to the constitution, and the American people.' Paul also warned that no one can predict how the Israel-Iran conflict could progress. 'History is replete with examples of leaders who in their hubris thought they could shape the fate of nations, but were subsequently proven wrong as events ended up controlling them,' he said. 'Pandora's box has been opened,' added Paul. 'Congress must now focus its effort on de-escalation and preventing the call for regime change – the consequences of which, if applied to Iran, risk the total destabilization of the Middle East.' The House could bring up its own Democrat-led war powers resolution after July 4. Republican Rep. Thomas Massie, who has faced heavy backlash from the administration for criticizing the strikes on Iran, had also introduced a war powers resolution as well, but ultimately decided not to bring it up amid a ceasefire in the Iran-Israel conflict. House Speaker Mike Johnson has sharply criticized members for demanding Trump receive congressional approval for strikes on Iran, adding that he doesn't believe the War Powers Act is constitutional. 'Many respected constitutional experts argue that the War Powers Act is itself unconstitutional. I'm persuaded by that argument. They think it's a violation of the Article Two powers of the commander in chief. I think that's right,' Johnson told reporters on Tuesday. He also called allegations that the strikes on Iran were unconstitutional, or even impeachable, 'outrageous.' 'It would be comical if it were not so serious and stupid. Let me be clear and be as clear as possible: the strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities were clearly within President Trump's Article Two powers as commander in chief. It shouldn't even be in dispute,' he said. Other Republicans also sharply criticized the resolution, with former Senate GOP Leader Mitch McConnell warning in a statement that it was 'divorced from both strategic and constitutional reality.' 'Was degrading Iran's nuclear capability without expanding the U.S. military footprint in the Middle East a mistake? Was it wrong to seize the rare opportunity made possible by Israel's operations over the last 20 months? Did it not demonstrably advance U.S. interests in the region? Or are isolationists correct in suggesting that such interests do not exist?' he asked.
CNN
28-06-2025
- Politics
- CNN
Senate fails to advance Iran War Powers resolution
The Senate on Friday rejected a Democrat-pushed resolution that aimed to rein in the president's ability to use military action against Iran without congressional approval. Sen. Tim Kaine, a Virginia Democrat, originally introduced the resolution last week, under the War Powers Act of 1973, before President Donald Trump authorized US strikes on three Iranian nuclear facilities. The resolution would have required congressional approval for any further strikes on Iran that are not in self-defense or due to imminent danger. 'I think the events of this week have demonstrated that war is too big to be consigned to the decision of any one person,' Kaine said on the Senate floor on Friday. 'War is too big an issue to leave to the moods and the whims and the daily vibes of any one person.' Lawmakers voted against advancing it to the Senate floor, 53-47. GOP Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky voted with Democrats to advance the resolution. Democratic Sen. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania voted against it. Friday's vote was a notable departure from a similar war powers vote in 2020 related to Iran, in which eight Republicans voted with Democrats, seven of whom are still in the Senate. GOP Sen. Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, one of those who had voted for the 2020 resolution and is now up for reelection, wrote on X Thursday, 'I'll be voting with Republicans against the war power resolution. When we're talking about nuclear weapons, the president should have the discretion he needs to act.' Indiana Sen. Todd Young, who also joined Democrats to back the resolution five years ago, said in his own post, 'Based on President Trump's stated goal of no further military action against Iran and conversations with senior national security officials regarding the Administration's future intentions, I do not believe an Iran war powers resolution is necessary at this time.' Sen. Susan Collins of Maine added, 'I continue to believe that Congress has an important responsibility to authorize the sustained use of military force. That is not the situation we are facing now. The President has the authority to defend our nation and our troops around the world against the threat of attack.' Paul declared he would back the resolution in a speech on the floor, in which he insisted Congress assert its constitutional authority. 'If we are to ask our young men and women to fight, and potentially give their lives, then we in this body can at least muster the courage to debate if American military intervention is warranted,' he said. 'Abdicating our constitutional responsibility by allowing the executive branch to unilaterally introduce US troops into wars is an affront to the constitution, and the American people.' Paul also warned that no one can predict how the Israel-Iran conflict could progress. 'History is replete with examples of leaders who in their hubris thought they could shape the fate of nations, but were subsequently proven wrong as events ended up controlling them,' he said. 'Pandora's box has been opened,' added Paul. 'Congress must now focus its effort on de-escalation and preventing the call for regime change – the consequences of which, if applied to Iran, risk the total destabilization of the Middle East.' The House could bring up its own Democrat-led war powers resolution after July 4. Republican Rep. Thomas Massie, who has faced heavy backlash from the administration for criticizing the strikes on Iran, had also introduced a war powers resolution as well, but ultimately decided not to bring it up amid a ceasefire in the Iran-Israel conflict. House Speaker Mike Johnson has sharply criticized members for demanding Trump receive congressional approval for strikes on Iran, adding that he doesn't believe the War Powers Act is constitutional. 'Many respected constitutional experts argue that the War Powers Act is itself unconstitutional. I'm persuaded by that argument. They think it's a violation of the Article Two powers of the commander in chief. I think that's right,' Johnson told reporters on Tuesday. He also called allegations that the strikes on Iran were unconstitutional, or even impeachable, 'outrageous.' 'It would be comical if it were not so serious and stupid. Let me be clear and be as clear as possible: the strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities were clearly within President Trump's Article Two powers as commander in chief. It shouldn't even be in dispute,' he said. Other Republicans also sharply criticized the resolution, with former Senate GOP Leader Mitch McConnell warning in a statement that it was 'divorced from both strategic and constitutional reality.' 'Was degrading Iran's nuclear capability without expanding the U.S. military footprint in the Middle East a mistake? Was it wrong to seize the rare opportunity made possible by Israel's operations over the last 20 months? Did it not demonstrably advance U.S. interests in the region? Or are isolationists correct in suggesting that such interests do not exist?' he asked.
CNN
28-06-2025
- Politics
- CNN
Senate fails to advance Iran War Powers resolution
The Senate on Friday rejected a Democrat-pushed resolution that aimed to rein in the president's ability to use military action against Iran without congressional approval. Sen. Tim Kaine, a Virginia Democrat, originally introduced the resolution last week, under the War Powers Act of 1973, before President Donald Trump authorized US strikes on three Iranian nuclear facilities. The resolution would have required congressional approval for any further strikes on Iran that are not in self-defense or due to imminent danger. 'I think the events of this week have demonstrated that war is too big to be consigned to the decision of any one person,' Kaine said on the Senate floor on Friday. 'War is too big an issue to leave to the moods and the whims and the daily vibes of any one person.' Lawmakers voted against advancing it to the Senate floor, 53-47. GOP Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky voted with Democrats to advance the resolution. Democratic Sen. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania voted against it. Friday's vote was a notable departure from a similar war powers vote in 2020 related to Iran, in which eight Republicans voted with Democrats, seven of whom are still in the Senate. GOP Sen. Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, one of those who had voted for the 2020 resolution and is now up for reelection, wrote on X Thursday, 'I'll be voting with Republicans against the war power resolution. When we're talking about nuclear weapons, the president should have the discretion he needs to act.' Indiana Sen. Todd Young, who also joined Democrats to back the resolution five years ago, said in his own post, 'Based on President Trump's stated goal of no further military action against Iran and conversations with senior national security officials regarding the Administration's future intentions, I do not believe an Iran war powers resolution is necessary at this time.' Sen. Susan Collins of Maine added, 'I continue to believe that Congress has an important responsibility to authorize the sustained use of military force. That is not the situation we are facing now. The President has the authority to defend our nation and our troops around the world against the threat of attack.' Paul declared he would back the resolution in a speech on the floor, in which he insisted Congress assert its constitutional authority. 'If we are to ask our young men and women to fight, and potentially give their lives, then we in this body can at least muster the courage to debate if American military intervention is warranted,' he said. 'Abdicating our constitutional responsibility by allowing the executive branch to unilaterally introduce US troops into wars is an affront to the constitution, and the American people.' Paul also warned that no one can predict how the Israel-Iran conflict could progress. 'History is replete with examples of leaders who in their hubris thought they could shape the fate of nations, but were subsequently proven wrong as events ended up controlling them,' he said. 'Pandora's box has been opened,' added Paul. 'Congress must now focus its effort on de-escalation and preventing the call for regime change – the consequences of which, if applied to Iran, risk the total destabilization of the Middle East.' The House could bring up its own Democrat-led war powers resolution after July 4. Republican Rep. Thomas Massie, who has faced heavy backlash from the administration for criticizing the strikes on Iran, had also introduced a war powers resolution as well, but ultimately decided not to bring it up amid a ceasefire in the Iran-Israel conflict. House Speaker Mike Johnson has sharply criticized members for demanding Trump receive congressional approval for strikes on Iran, adding that he doesn't believe the War Powers Act is constitutional. 'Many respected constitutional experts argue that the War Powers Act is itself unconstitutional. I'm persuaded by that argument. They think it's a violation of the Article Two powers of the commander in chief. I think that's right,' Johnson told reporters on Tuesday. He also called allegations that the strikes on Iran were unconstitutional, or even impeachable, 'outrageous.' 'It would be comical if it were not so serious and stupid. Let me be clear and be as clear as possible: the strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities were clearly within President Trump's Article Two powers as commander in chief. It shouldn't even be in dispute,' he said. Other Republicans also sharply criticized the resolution, with former Senate GOP Leader Mitch McConnell warning in a statement that it was 'divorced from both strategic and constitutional reality.' 'Was degrading Iran's nuclear capability without expanding the U.S. military footprint in the Middle East a mistake? Was it wrong to seize the rare opportunity made possible by Israel's operations over the last 20 months? Did it not demonstrably advance U.S. interests in the region? Or are isolationists correct in suggesting that such interests do not exist?' he asked.
Boston Globe
26-06-2025
- Politics
- Boston Globe
Protesters rally downtown to say 'No War On Iran'
Susan Etscovitz from Brookline holds a sign as she sits with other at a noontime rally. John Tlumacki/Globe Staff 'I'm an Over the past two weeks, decades-old tensions between Israel and Iran once again erupted into warfare. On June 13, Israel struck nuclear facilities across Iran. Advertisement According to Iran's health ministry, this and subsequent strikes reportedly Kimia Kahalzadeh, a 19-year-old UMass Amherst student and Iranian American who immigrated to the United States when she was 6, said she boarded a flight out of Tehran just hours before the bombing began on the evening of June 13. While in the air, she received frantic messages from family members following the attacks in real-time. 'My heart sank,' she said. Her great-grandmother, who lived just two houses down from a bombed building in Tehran, fell during the blast and tore her ACL. Advertisement 'She hasn't been able to walk,' Kahalzadeh said. 'Thankfully, her son was able to get her out of Tehran.' Kahalzadeh said she hardly could believe she had walked through the same streets that were bombed just days later. 'These weren't military targets. There were homes. There were neighborhoods, communities, people,' she said. In the following days, both countries exchanged further strikes until the conflict escalated on Saturday, when the US bombed three Iranian nuclear facilities. A tentative ceasefire between Israel and Iran was announced early on Tuesday, with both sides agreeing to halt offensive operations. But many protesters do not 'actually trust the ceasefire will hold' and continue to worry about an escalated conflict, Sharafi said. Iranian-American organizer Ziba Cranmer said successive US administrations have failed to reckon with the country's role in shaping Iran's current circumstances. '[The United States] got rid of a democratically elected leader that was wildly popular and very social justice oriented in the '50s,' Cranmer said, referencing former Iranian Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh,who was overthrown in a US-backed military coup that cemented the reign of Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. 'We've spent trillions of dollars in the last two decades around war in the Middle East,' she added. 'People cannot afford to live in this city. I want them to fund housing vouchers, schools, and hospitals. I don't want to fund weapons.' State Senator Jamie Eldridge,who represents the Middlesex and Worcester districts, urged Congress to 'pass the War Powers resolution and stop Donald Trump from taking us into another war in the Middle East.' Advertisement 'It is absolutely critical that the American people rise up and say, 'Not in our name,'' said Eldridge. Staffers from both Senator Elizabeth Warren and Senator Edward Markey's offices also spoke at the rally, voicing their bosses' opposition to what they called President Trump's 'unconstitutional' attack on Iran and expressing support for the War Powers resolution aimed at limiting further military action. Sharafi said organizers plan to keep pushing for a permanent ceasefire. She sees a need for a 'robust anti-war movement' in the US. 'There's a lot of stress and trauma of not knowing what is going to happen. It's been great that we have allies here,' she said, pointing to the crowd of protesters. 'People in the [Middle East] don't deserve to constantly be bombed or threatened.' Nathan Metcalf can be reached at
