The House approved a resolution on Thursday to force the president to halt military action against Iran without Congressional authorization, restarting conversations on the role of Congress in war. Lawmakers voted largely along party lines, with the final vote tallied 224-194. Eight Democrats voted against the resolution and three Republicans voted in favor.

The bill, introduced by Michigan Democrat Elissa Slotkin, limits the president’s war-making power by requiring the president to seek an Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) before possibly taking the U.S. into a war with Iran.

An aide to the congresswoman told Cheddar the bill aims to limit the president’s ability to wage such a conflict without consulting Congress.

“If our loved ones are going to be sent to fight in any protracted war, the President owes the American people a public conversation about why and for what ends,” Slotkin said in a press release.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said in a press conference earlier Thursday, before the vote, that the justification the White House used to justify the strike against Iran’s top military leader Gen. Qassem Soleimani was “foggy.” Slotkin noted Soleimani “was the architect of some of the worst destabilizing activities in the Middle East. But his behavior does not mean that the Administration can disregard the Constitution by engaging in a wider war, without consulting first with Congress.”

Democrats and at least two Republican senators have been publically skeptical of the administration’s justification for the drone strike, which has rotated between the contention the administration was preventing an “imminent threat,” that Iran was “looking to blow up our embassy,” and that Soleimani’s actions in the past were rationalization enough for the strike. The Trump administration has not explicitly offered a public legal justification but seems to indicate the rationale is based in the 2001 or 2002 AUMF measures that supported the War on Terror and the war in Iraq, respectively.

Under the War Powers Act of 1973, the president is supposed to brief Congress within 48 hours of an unauthorized executive military action. Lawmakers were not satisfied with the White House’s decision not to speak with Congress before the attack.

After Senators were finally briefed by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, Defense Secretary Mark Esper, and CIA Director Gina Haspel five days after the attack, Senators Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and Mike Lee (R-Utah) joined Democrats in questioning the administration's strategy and raising concerns about its justifications. Both Republicans have indicated they would back a Senate version of the House resolution, with Lee saying the briefing was “insulting and demeaning to the Constitution of the United States.”

According to the resolution, a version of which was introduced to the GOP-controlled Senate by Democratic Senator Tim Kaine of Virginia, the president must end the use of U.S. armed forces to engage in hostilities in or against Iran unless formally authorized by Congress or if there is an “imminent armed attack upon the United States.” Lee’s press secretary confirmed he would vote for Kaine’s resolution but also supported the strike against Soleimani. Senator Mitt Romney confirmed he spoke to Kaine about the resolution, but did not yet support it. If Lee and Paul indeed voted for the resolution, Democrats would still need two more Republican votes to pass it in the Senate.

House Democrats voted using a concurrent resolution rather than a joint resolution, as the president is never presented with a concurrent resolution to sign. A concurrent resolution is simply enacted once the House and the Senate vote to approve it.

Share:
More In Politics
Trump administration appeals ruling blocking firing of Fed Governor
President Donald Trump's administration is appealing a ruling blocking him from immediately firing Federal Reserve Gov. Lisa Cook as he seeks more control over the traditionally independent board. The notice of appeal was filed Wednesday, hours after U.S. District Judge Jia Cobb handed down the ruling. The White House insists the Republican president had the right to fire Cook over mortgage fraud allegations involving properties in Michigan and Georgia from before she joined the Fed. Cook's lawsuit denies the allegations and says the firing was unlawful. The case could soon reach the Supreme Court, which has allowed Trump to fire members of other independent agencies but suggested that power has limitations at the Fed.
Al Sharpton to lead pro-DEI march through Wall Street
The Rev. Al Sharpton is set to lead a protest march on Wall Street to urge corporate America to resist the Trump administration’s campaign to roll back diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives. The New York civil rights leader will join clergy, labor and community leaders Thursday in a demonstration through Manhattan’s Financial District that’s timed with the anniversary of the Civil Rights-era March on Washington in 1963. Sharpton called DEI the “civil rights fight of our generation." He and other Black leaders have called for boycotting American retailers that scaled backed policies and programs aimed at bolstering diversity and reducing discrimination in their ranks.
Embattled Fed Gov. Lisa Cook says she’ll sue Trump to keep her job
Federal Reserve Gov. Lisa Cook's lawyer says she'll sue President Donald Trump's administration to try to prevent him from firing her. Longtime Washington attorney Abbe Lowell said Tuesday that Trump “has no authority to remove” Cook. If Trump succeeds in removing Cook from the Fed's board of governors, it could erode the Fed’s political independence, which is considered critical to its ability to fight inflation because it enables the Fed to take unpopular steps like raising interest rates. The Republican president said Monday he was removing Cook because of allegations she committed mortgage fraud. Cook was appointed by Democratic President Joe Biden in 2022 and says she won't step down.
Load More