Wed, June 25, 2025
Tue, June 24, 2025
Mon, June 23, 2025
Sun, June 22, 2025
Sat, June 21, 2025
Fri, June 20, 2025
[ Last Friday ]: MSNBC
Unflinching Obligation
Thu, June 19, 2025
Wed, June 18, 2025
Tue, June 17, 2025
Mon, June 16, 2025
Sun, June 15, 2025
Sat, June 14, 2025
Fri, June 13, 2025
Thu, June 12, 2025
Wed, June 11, 2025
Tue, June 10, 2025
Mon, June 9, 2025

Capitol agenda: How Johnson may block an Iran rebuke


  Copy link into your clipboard //politics-government.news-articles.net/content/ .. agenda-how-johnson-may-block-an-iran-rebuke.html
  Print publication without navigation Published in Politics and Government on by Politico
          🞛 This publication is a summary or evaluation of another publication 🞛 This publication contains editorial commentary or bias from the source


  The speaker could move this week against Reps. Thomas Massie and Ro Khanna's war powers resolution.

The article from Politico, published on June 23, 2025, discusses a significant legislative move in the U.S. Congress regarding the authorization of military force against Iran. The resolution, which has garnered bipartisan support, aims to reassert Congress's constitutional authority over war powers, a topic that has been contentious, especially during the Trump administration. The key figures involved in this legislative effort include House Speaker Mike Johnson, Senators Tim Kaine and Rand Paul, and Representatives Thomas Massie and Ro Khanna.

The resolution seeks to repeal the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) and the 2002 Iraq AUMF, which have been used by successive administrations to justify military actions in the Middle East without specific congressional approval. The move is seen as an attempt to prevent future presidents from engaging in military actions against Iran without explicit congressional authorization. This is particularly relevant given the heightened tensions between the U.S. and Iran, which have been exacerbated by recent incidents, including attacks on U.S. forces in the region and Iran's nuclear program.

House Speaker Mike Johnson has been a vocal proponent of the resolution, emphasizing the need for Congress to reclaim its war powers. Johnson argues that the executive branch has overstepped its authority, particularly during the Trump administration, which he believes used the existing AUMFs to justify military actions that should have required congressional approval. Johnson's stance is supported by a diverse group of lawmakers, including both Democrats and Republicans, who share concerns about the erosion of congressional authority over military actions.

Senators Tim Kaine and Rand Paul have been instrumental in pushing the resolution forward in the Senate. Kaine, a Democrat, has long been an advocate for reining in the executive branch's war powers, arguing that Congress must fulfill its constitutional duty to declare war. Paul, a Republican, shares this view and has been a vocal critic of the expansive use of AUMFs. Their bipartisan collaboration underscores the broad support for the resolution across party lines.

In the House, Representatives Thomas Massie and Ro Khanna have been leading the charge. Massie, a Republican, has been a consistent critic of the executive branch's overreach in military matters. He believes that the resolution is crucial to restoring the balance of power between the branches of government. Khanna, a Democrat, echoes these sentiments and has been a strong advocate for ending the "forever wars" that have been justified by the existing AUMFs. Their efforts have helped to build a coalition of lawmakers who are committed to passing the resolution.

The resolution's text explicitly states that any military action against Iran must be authorized by Congress, except in cases of imminent threat to the United States. This provision is intended to prevent the executive branch from using the existing AUMFs to justify military actions against Iran without congressional approval. The resolution also calls for a comprehensive review of the U.S. military presence in the Middle East, with the goal of reducing the U.S. footprint in the region and transitioning to a more diplomatic approach.

The legislative effort comes at a time when tensions between the U.S. and Iran are at a high point. Recent incidents, including attacks on U.S. forces in Iraq and Syria, have raised concerns about the potential for a broader conflict. Iran's nuclear program has also been a point of contention, with the U.S. and its allies expressing concerns about Iran's compliance with international agreements. The resolution is seen as a way to prevent the escalation of tensions into a full-scale war, by ensuring that any military action against Iran is subject to congressional oversight.

The resolution has faced opposition from some quarters, particularly from those who argue that it could embolden Iran and undermine U.S. national security. Critics argue that the existing AUMFs provide the flexibility needed to respond to threats from Iran and other actors in the region. They contend that repealing these authorizations could tie the hands of the executive branch and leave the U.S. vulnerable to attack.

Despite these concerns, the resolution has gained significant momentum in Congress. The bipartisan support for the measure reflects a growing consensus that the executive branch has overstepped its authority in military matters. The resolution's passage would mark a significant shift in U.S. policy towards Iran and the broader Middle East, signaling a return to a more restrained and deliberative approach to military action.

The legislative process for the resolution is expected to be contentious, with debates likely to focus on the balance between congressional authority and executive flexibility in responding to threats. The resolution's supporters argue that it is essential to uphold the Constitution's separation of powers and ensure that any military action against Iran is subject to democratic oversight. They believe that the resolution will help to prevent the U.S. from being drawn into another protracted conflict in the Middle East.

In conclusion, the resolution to repeal the 2001 and 2002 AUMFs and require congressional authorization for military action against Iran represents a significant effort to reassert Congress's war powers. The bipartisan support for the measure, led by figures such as House Speaker Mike Johnson, Senators Tim Kaine and Rand Paul, and Representatives Thomas Massie and Ro Khanna, underscores the widespread concern about the executive branch's overreach in military matters. The resolution's passage would mark a pivotal moment in U.S. foreign policy, signaling a commitment to a more restrained and deliberative approach to military action in the Middle East.

Read the Full Politico Article at:
[ https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2025/06/23/congress/iran-resolution-war-power-trump-johnson-kaine-massie-khanna-00417933 ]

Publication Contributing Sources