A resolution requiring congressional approval for future military operations in Venezuela narrowly passed a key Senate test vote on Thursday, just five days after President Donald Trump sent forces to capture and depose President Nicolás Maduro without first informing Congress. Five Republicans joined all Democrats in voting for the measure, marking a significant rebuke of the administration.
The resolution, sponsored by Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia, was the Senate’s second attempt to restrain the Trump administration in confronting Venezuela, including airstrikes on alleged drug boats. It now heads to a final vote, expected next week. A similar resolution was rejected by the House last month; House Democrats reintroduced that measure on Thursday.
The vote remains essentially symbolic, as President Trump has already vowed to veto the measure, should it reach his desk. While some GOP lawmakers have expressed concerns about the administration’s Venezuela policy, and many roundly rejected the idea that the United States should seize Greenland, Thursday’s vote largely fell along partisan lines.
Why We Wrote This
The measure requiring congressional approval for future military operations is essentially symbolic. Still, it hints at new pushback from the GOP-controlled legislative branch toward the Trump administration.
Still, the Senate’s action hinted at new pushback from the GOP-controlled legislative branch, which has so far largely greenlit Mr. Trump’s expansive presidency. Republicans have shied away from confronting Mr. Trump, even when Congress’ power of the purse has been breached, while Democrats have limited avenues for recourse.
But this week, the House – where Republicans’ already slim majority has narrowed since the departure of former Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene and the death of Rep. Doug LaMalfa – advanced a Democratic measure to extend health insurance subsidies, after some centrist Republicans joined with Democrats in signing a discharge petition to force a vote. The measure passed the House Thursday, with support from 17 Republicans. The House also voted Thursday on overriding a veto from President Trump on a Colorado water bill that had passed both chambers unanimously. That measure failed to achieve the necessary two-thirds majority, but won support from 35 Republicans.
Mr. Trump responded to Thursday’s war powers vote with a scathing statement on social media, saying the five GOP senators who voted with Democrats “should never be elected to office again.” The president contended that the move would hamper national security.
Congress’ wariness over checking an administration’s military actions predates Mr. Trump. Past administrations, both Democratic and Republican, have used force without checking with lawmakers, says Sarah Burns, a political scientist at the Rochester Institute of Technology and expert on the 1973 War Powers Resolution.
That act has become the go-to for lawmakers seeking to restrain administrations. It was the basis for Senator Kaine’s resolution and for Democrats more broadly to criticize the Trump administration for failing to consult Congress in advance of the Jan. 1 military operation in Venezuela.
Many Republicans argue that the War Powers Act is not applicable in this case. “This is not a war. This is a law enforcement operation to arrest somebody pursuant to a warrant issued by federal court,” says Sen. John Cornyn from Texas, referring to charges faced by Mr. Maduro for alleged drug trafficking. The deposed leader pleaded not guilty Tuesday in a New York court.
John Kennedy, a GOP senator from Louisiana, characterized Thursday’s resolution as an overreach. “I have great respect for Tim [Kaine], but I think it’s an effort to throw a wrench in the administration’s plans for arresting criminals in South America,” he says.
Democrats say Congress should be involved in the exercise of U.S. military power around the world and that Thursday’s vote was an important step toward reclaiming that role. “It would tell the president he can’t just go invade any country he feels like without congressional authorization,” says Sen. Mazie Hirono of Hawaii.
Under Article 1 of the Constitution, Congress has the power to “declare war” and to “raise and support armies.” But that language reflects the war-making statecraft of the 18th century, when rulers had to levy taxes to raise armies and warfare was largely state-based.
Since then, the U.S. has used military force overseas on hundreds of occasions, but only declared war five times, according to John Yoo, a conservative legal scholar who served in the second Bush administration. “The record of American military conflicts is notable for the absence, not the presence, of declarations of war by Congress,” he writes.
Congress has the power of appropriations to determine military deployments, but often shies away from actually using it, says Professor Burns. “What we see instead is [legislators] going on talk shows, writing memos and pieces in newspapers saying the president has overstepped his bounds rather than asserting their powers to … reassert themselves into the realm of foreign policy and in the realm of war,” she says.
Sen. Rueben Gallego, a Democrat from Arizona, has proposed an amendment to a defense appropriations bill related to the use of force in Greenland, an autonomous region ruled by Denmark, a NATO ally. It would prevent funds from being used to prepare for or carry out military operations in Greenland.
The last time Congress made a comprehensive attempt at limiting the president’s war powers was in 2021. A bipartisan group of senators –Republican Mike Lee of Utah, independent Bernie Sanders of Vermont, and Democrat Chris Murphy of Connecticut – authorized a bill that would have required administrations to seek explicit approval from Congress for all military operations. The bill would have also automatically cut off funding when its standards weren’t met.
It failed to pass.
Editor’s note: This article was updated on Thursday evening to include the latest House votes.
