Latest news with #warPowers
Wall Street Journal
01-07-2025
- Politics
- Wall Street Journal
My War Powers Vote Was No Partisan ‘Stunt'
When the president considered launching strikes on targets in the Middle East without notifying or seeking approval from Congress, I challenged him. That president was my friend Barack Obama. I was new to the Senate, a member of the Armed Services Committee, the father of a Marine and representing the most pro-military state in the nation. Since then, I have argued that no president, Democratic or Republican, should have the singular authority to wage war. The Constitution grants the Legislature, not the chief executive, the power to do so.
Free Malaysia Today
30-06-2025
- Politics
- Free Malaysia Today
US Senate rejects bid to curb Trump's Iran war powers
US Senator Tim Kaine has tried for years to wrest back Congress' authority to declare war from both Republican and Democratic presidents. (AP pic) WASHINGTON : The Republican-led US Senate rejected a Democratic-led bid on Friday to block President Donald Trump from using further military force against Iran, hours after the president said he would consider more bombing. The Senate vote was 53 to 47 against a war powers resolution that would have required congressional approval for more hostilities against Iran. The vote was along party lines, except Pennsylvania Democrat John Fetterman voted no, with Republicans, and Kentucky Republican Rand Paul voted yes, with Democrats. Senator Tim Kaine, chief sponsor of the resolution, has tried for years to wrest back Congress' authority to declare war from both Republican and Democratic presidents. Kaine said his latest effort underscored that the US Constitution gives Congress, not the president, the sole power to declare war and requires that any hostility with Iran be explicitly authorised by a declaration of war or specific authorisation for the use of military force. 'If you think the president should have to come to Congress, whether you are for or against a war in Iran, you'll support Senate Joint Resolution 59, you'll support the Constitution that has stood the test of time,' Kaine said in a speech before the vote. Lawmakers have been pushing for more information about weekend US strikes on Iran and the fate of Iran's stockpiles of highly enriched uranium. Earlier on Friday, Trump sharply criticised Iran's Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei, dropped plans to lift sanctions on Iran, and said he would consider bombing Iran again if Tehran is enriching uranium to worrisome levels. He was reacting to Khamenei's first remarks after a 12-day conflict with Israel that ended when the US launched bombing raids against Iranian nuclear sites. 'Obliterated' Members of Trump's national security team held classified briefings on the strikes for the Senate and House of Representatives on Thursday and Friday. Many Democratic lawmakers left the briefings saying they had not been convinced that Iran's nuclear facilities had been 'obliterated', as Trump announced shortly after the raid. Opponents of the resolution said the strike on Iran was a single, limited operation within Trump's rights as commander-in-chief, not the start of sustained hostilities. Senator Bill Hagerty, a Tennessee Republican who served as ambassador to Japan during Trump's first term, said the measure could prevent any president from acting quickly against a country that has been a long-term adversary. 'We must not shackle our president in the middle of a crisis when lives are on the line,' Hagerty said before the vote. Trump has rejected any suggestion that damage to Iran's nuclear programme was not as profound as he has said. Iran says its nuclear research is for civilian energy production. Under US law, Senate war powers resolutions are privileged, meaning that the chamber had to promptly consider and vote on the measure, which Kaine introduced this month. But to be enacted, the resolution would have had to pass the Senate as well as the House of Representatives, where Speaker Mike Johnson, a close Trump ally, said this week he did not think it was the right time for such an effort. During Trump's first term, in 2020, Kaine introduced a similar resolution to rein in the Republican president's ability to wage war against Iran. That measure passed both the Senate and House of Representatives, with some Republican support, but did not garner enough votes to survive the president's veto.
The Guardian
28-06-2025
- Politics
- The Guardian
US Senate votes down resolution to restrict Trump from escalating Iran war
Senate Democrats failed on Friday to get a war-powers resolution passed to limit Donald Trump's ability to single-handedly escalate the war with Iran. The resolution, 'to direct the removal of United States Armed Forces from hostilities against the Islamic Republic of Iran', was voted down 53-47. The vote on the resolution, introduced by the Democratic senator Tim Kaine of Virginia, split along mainly partisan lines. One Republican, Rand Paul of Kentucky, voted for it; one Democrat, John Fetterman of Pennsylvania, voted against it. 'Congress declares war,' Kaine said in a speech on the Senate floor. He stressed that the framers of the US constitution in 1787 were so wary of giving the power to start wars to one person that they did not even entrust it to George Washington, the first commander-in-chief. 'They decided that war was too big a decision for one person,' Kaine said. 'And so they wrote a constitution that said the United States should not be at war without a vote of Congress.' The measure would have compelled Trump to seek authorization from Congress before taking any further military action. Trump ordered airstrikes on Iran's nuclear facilities on 22 June. This directly followed Israel launching attacks on Iran, and Iran retaliating. Trump said that the US bombardment 'totally obliterated' key nuclear enrichment facilities and deemed the mission a success, although some initial reports said the damage was minimal. Iran condemned the attacks. Trump claimed on Friday that Iran had halted its nuclear ambitions after the bombings. But, he said, he would 'absolutely' continue to attack the country's nuclear sites if he believed it was once again enriching uranium. 'Time will tell,' Trump said at the White House. 'But I don't believe that they're going to go back into nuclear anytime soon.' Later on Friday, Iran's foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, rebuked Trump on social media. 'If President Trump is genuine about wanting a deal, he should put aside the disrespectful and unacceptable tone towards Iran's Supreme Leader, Grand Ayatollah Khamenei, and stop hurting his millions of heartfelt followers', Araghchi wrote on X. 'The Great and Powerful Iranian People, who showed the world that the Israeli regime had NO CHOICE but to RUN to 'Daddy' to avoid being flattened by our Missiles, do not take kindly to Threats and Insults', Iran's top diplomat added, in something approximating Trump's own social media style. 'If Illusions lead to worse mistakes, Iran will not hesitate to unveil its Real Capabilities, which will certainly END any Delusion about the Power of Iran.'
Yahoo
28-06-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
US Senate votes down resolution to restrict Trump from escalating Iran war
Senate Democrats failed on Friday to get a war-powers resolution passed to limit Donald Trump's ability to single-handedly escalate the war with Iran. The resolution, 'to direct the removal of United States Armed Forces from hostilities against the Islamic Republic of Iran', was voted down 53-47. The vote on the resolution, introduced by the Democratic senator Tim Kaine of Virginia, split along mainly partisan lines. One Republican, Rand Paul of Kentucky, voted for it; one Democrat, John Fetterman of Pennsylvania, voted against it. 'Congress declares war,' Kaine said in a speech on the Senate floor. He stressed that the framers of the US constitution in 1787 were so wary of giving the power to start wars to one person that they did not even entrust it to George Washington, the first commander-in-chief. 'They decided that war was too big a decision for one person,' Kaine said. 'And so they wrote a constitution that said the United States should not be at war without a vote of Congress.' The measure would have compelled Trump to seek authorization from Congress before taking any further military action. Trump ordered airstrikes on Iran's nuclear facilities on 22 June. This directly followed Israel launching attacks on Iran, and Iran retaliating. Trump said that the US bombardment 'totally obliterated' key nuclear enrichment facilities and deemed the mission a success, although some initial reports said the damage was minimal. Iran condemned the attacks. Trump claimed on Friday that Iran had halted its nuclear ambitions after the bombings. But, he said, he would 'absolutely' continue to attack the country's nuclear sites if he believed it was once again enriching uranium. 'Time will tell,' Trump said at the White House. 'But I don't believe that they're going to go back into nuclear anytime soon.' Later on Friday, Iran's foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, rebuked Trump on social media. 'If President Trump is genuine about wanting a deal, he should put aside the disrespectful and unacceptable tone towards Iran's Supreme Leader, Grand Ayatollah Khamenei, and stop hurting his millions of heartfelt followers', Araghchi wrote on X. 'The Great and Powerful Iranian People, who showed the world that the Israeli regime had NO CHOICE but to RUN to 'Daddy' to avoid being flattened by our Missiles, do not take kindly to Threats and Insults', Iran's top diplomat added, in something approximating Trump's own social media style. 'If Illusions lead to worse mistakes, Iran will not hesitate to unveil its Real Capabilities, which will certainly END any Delusion about the Power of Iran.'
CBS News
28-06-2025
- Politics
- CBS News
Senate votes down measure restricting Trump from further military action in Iran
Will bipartisan war powers resolution hold up as it moves through Congress? Washington — The Senate on Friday voted down an effort to block President Trump from using further military force against Iran, as Democratic anger festers over the lack of details about the recent strikes on the country's nuclear facilities. The measure failed in a 47-53 vote, with Republican Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky voting with most Democrats in favor of the resolution, and Democratic Sen. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania voting with most Republicans against it. Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia introduced the war powers resolution days before the U.S. bombed three locations central to Iran's nuclear program, seeking to force the president to get congressional authorization before entering the conflict between Israel and Iran. "The events of this week have demonstrated that war is too big to be consigned to the decisions of any one person," Kaine said on the Senate floor ahead of the vote. Since the measure was introduced, Mr. Trump announced a ceasefire between the adversaries and declared that Iran's nuclear sites were "obliterated" during the 12-day war. On Friday, Mr. Trump said he would "without question" consider bombing Iran again if Tehran was enriching uranium to a level that concerned the U.S. But anger from Democrats, including those who have said that Iran should never be able to obtain a nuclear weapon, has simmered as they say they have been left in the dark about U.S. military actions. It's led some Democrats to question whether the Trump administration is misleading the public about the strikes, especially after an initial classified assessment found that they set back Tehran's nuclear program by a matter of months. Mr. Trump, meanwhile, has said the nuclear program was set back "basically decades." Top intelligence officials said Wednesday that new intelligence showed the nuclear program had been "severely damaged" and its facilities "destroyed." It would take the Iranians "years" to rebuild the facilities, CIA Director John Ratcliffe and Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard said. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth called it "an historically successful attack" in a contentious press briefing Thursday. Classified briefings for the Senate and House were originally scheduled for Tuesday, the same day the initial assessment was leaked. Officials briefed senators on Thursday afternoon and House members on Friday. A White House official said Tuesday the Senate briefing was postponed because of "evolved circumstances as a result of recent positive developments in the Middle East." After the briefings, some Democrats cast doubt on the administration's characterization of the strikes and questioned assertions regarding how much Iran's nuclear program has been hindered. "I walk away from that briefing still under the belief that we have not obliterated the program," Sen. Chris Murphy, a Connecticut Democrat, told reporters. "The president was deliberately misleading the public when he said the program was obliterated. It is certain that there is still significant capability, significant equipment that remain." Rep. Jason Crow, a Colorado Democrat who sits on the House Intelligence Committee, said the information disclosed in the briefing was "massively different than what has been told to Congress over the last year, up until a month ago, about both Iranian capabilities and Iranian intent." Crow said he was "not convinced of that whatsoever" when asked whether Iranian nuclear facilities had been obliterated. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, a New York Democrat, has railed against a lack of transparency and said earlier this week the administration had not presented Congress with any evidence that Iran posed an imminent threat requiring immediate military action. But Jeffries did not go as far as supporting a resolution to impeach Mr. Trump over the bombings. He and more than 120 Democrats voted with all Republicans to kill the measure, which was introduced by Democratic Rep. Al Green of Texas, on Tuesday. Rep. Jim Himes of Connecticut, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, also questioned the timing of the strikes. "It's pretty clear that there was no imminent threat to the United States," Himes said. "There's always an Iranian threat to the world. But ... I have not seen anything to suggest that the threat from the Iranians was radically different last Saturday than it was two Saturdays ago." Kaine's resolution was one of a handful of similar efforts seeking to curtail further U.S. involvement in Iran, though it's unclear whether any will be successful in a Congress controlled narrowly by Republicans. Some Republicans who were initially supportive of the resolutions, like Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky, appear to be backing away from forcing a vote as long as the ceasefire holds and the U.S. does not conduct any further bombings. And House Speaker Mike Johnson, a Louisiana Republican, called the efforts irrelevant because Iran and Israel agreed to stop the fighting. "It's kind of a moot point now, isn't it?" Johnson said Monday. "It seems rather silly at this point and I hope they'll acknowledge it as such and put it to bed because it has zero chance of passing anyway." Senate Majority Leader John Thune told The Wall Street Journal this week he believes Mr. Trump acted "perfectly within his authority" by striking Iran. "I don't think there's any question the president has the authority legally and constitutionally to do what he did," the South Dakota Republican said. "There are always questions around these things, but past presidents and both political parties have similarly acted in circumstances where there've been airstrikes at various places around the world where our national security interests dictated it." The Constitution gives Congress the power to declare war, and most major military conflicts in recent history have been launched under an authorization for the use of military force passed by Congress. But presidents have periodically acted without explicit permission from lawmakers, including during President Bill Clinton's 1999 bombing of Yugoslavia and President Barack Obama's 2011 airstrikes on Libya, the Congressional Research Service notes. In announcing his support for Kaine's resolution, Paul said Congress was abdicating its constitutional responsibility by allowing a president to act unilaterally and warned that last week's strikes could have unintended consequences. "Despite the tactical success of our strikes, they may end up proving to be a strategic failure. It is unclear if this intervention will fully curtail Iran's nuclear aspirations, or, in fact, whether the Iranians may well conclude to double down on their efforts to obtain a nuclear weapon," Paul said. Those opposed to the resolution argued that Mr. Trump acted within his constitutional authority and that the measure would constrain the president's ability to respond quickly to a threat. In an interview last week with CBS News' Major Garrett, Kaine acknowledged that his resolution could fail but said he wanted his colleagues to be on the record about U.S. involvement in another war. "Everyone in the Senate should agree that this is a matter of such gravity and importance that we shouldn't allow war to begin without Congress having a debate in full view of the American public and members of the Senate and House having to go on the record about it," he said. , and contributed to this report.
