Senate Republicans have dealt a setback to efforts to curb President Donald Trump's authority to wage war, as they voted to reject a war powers resolution aimed at limiting his ability to conduct further military operations in Venezuela.
The rejection comes after intense pressure from the president, who had called on several Republican senators to reverse their support for the legislation. The bill would have required Trump to obtain congressional approval before deploying troops to the South American country, where he has been conducting naval patrols and backing opposition groups fighting against socialist leader Nicolás Maduro.
Two GOP senators, Josh Hawley of Missouri and Todd Young of Indiana, had previously supported the war powers resolution but reversed their stance under pressure from Trump. Young told reporters that he had received assurances from Secretary of State Marco Rubio that the administration would seek congressional authorization in advance if it engaged in "major military operations" in Venezuela.
Trump's push to reject the bill has been seen as a test of Republican loyalty to him, and his aggressive foreign policy ambitions have raised concerns among lawmakers on both sides of the aisle. Democrats have filed a similar war powers resolution, which can be brought to a vote as soon as next week.
The outcome of the high-profile vote highlights the growing unease among Republicans about Trump's use of military power abroad. A new poll found that more than half of US adults believe the president has "gone too far" in using the military to intervene in other countries.
The war powers resolution is part of a broader debate over the limits of presidential authority and the role of Congress in overseeing foreign policy. Critics argue that Trump's actions amount to a "dangerous drift towards endless war," while proponents say it would tie his hands and hinder the country's ability to respond to emerging crises.
As the US and Venezuela remain locked in a standoff, lawmakers are grappling with the implications of Trump's aggressive stance and the need for clear guidance on the use of military force.
The rejection comes after intense pressure from the president, who had called on several Republican senators to reverse their support for the legislation. The bill would have required Trump to obtain congressional approval before deploying troops to the South American country, where he has been conducting naval patrols and backing opposition groups fighting against socialist leader Nicolás Maduro.
Two GOP senators, Josh Hawley of Missouri and Todd Young of Indiana, had previously supported the war powers resolution but reversed their stance under pressure from Trump. Young told reporters that he had received assurances from Secretary of State Marco Rubio that the administration would seek congressional authorization in advance if it engaged in "major military operations" in Venezuela.
Trump's push to reject the bill has been seen as a test of Republican loyalty to him, and his aggressive foreign policy ambitions have raised concerns among lawmakers on both sides of the aisle. Democrats have filed a similar war powers resolution, which can be brought to a vote as soon as next week.
The outcome of the high-profile vote highlights the growing unease among Republicans about Trump's use of military power abroad. A new poll found that more than half of US adults believe the president has "gone too far" in using the military to intervene in other countries.
The war powers resolution is part of a broader debate over the limits of presidential authority and the role of Congress in overseeing foreign policy. Critics argue that Trump's actions amount to a "dangerous drift towards endless war," while proponents say it would tie his hands and hinder the country's ability to respond to emerging crises.
As the US and Venezuela remain locked in a standoff, lawmakers are grappling with the implications of Trump's aggressive stance and the need for clear guidance on the use of military force.
... Senate Republicans reject this war powers resolution to curb Trump's authority to wage war in Venezuela, but isn't that kinda the point? I mean, if they're not gonna stand up to him, who is? It's like they're just playin' along with his aggressive foreign policy ambitions. And what's with all these concerns about "Republican loyalty" 
... can't they see that Trump's actions are just causin' more problems than they're solvin'? 
... and I'm like, yeah, no kidding! It's not exactly rocket science. We gotta find a balance between bein' tough on foreign policy and actually thinkin' about the consequences of our actions.
... it's like they're just waitin' for Republicans to make the first move. Either way, I hope our lawmakers can get their act together and start thinkin' about what's best for the country instead of just followin' the crowd 
Democrats need to bring their own bill next week and hopefully we'll get some clarity on what Congress is willing to do. It's not ideal, but I guess that's the state of politics right now 
.
... I mean, I get why they're trying to limit Trump's authority, but at the same time, can't they see how this whole thing is just gonna lead to more chaos and problems? 
I remember when Nixon was president and all those crazy things were happening in 'Nam... it's like history is repeating itself and we're all doomed 
. But seriously, this war powers resolution thing needs to be taken seriously because what if Trump actually does go off the rails? 
It's not just about Venezuela; it's about how much power we're giving him to make life-or-death decisions without any checks or balances 
... I just can't imagine what would happen if he used it to do something crazy 
. Anyways, I'm all about holding our leaders accountable and making sure they're not abusing their power 
, but at the same time, we gotta be careful not to overreact or jump on every bandwagon that comes along 
. Can't we just have a decent discussion about this without it getting so heated? 
It's like they're saying "we're gonna do what Trump wants us to do, no matter what". Not cool.
.
. We need some real leadership here, not just people who are too scared to stand up for what's right. 
We need to make sure our presidents aren't just waging war for war's sake, you know? 
It's not like we haven't seen enough of that already... the Iraq War, Afghanistan... 
Can't we just talk it out? 
It's like he's above the law or something... 
. What if they had stuck to their original stance? Would've been interesting to see how the opposition would've responded... Anyway, this whole thing raises some valid questions about presidential powers and Congressional oversight 
. It's not just about Trump, it's about setting a precedent for future presidents 
u r feelin the pressure from pres trump right now 
.
...
. I mean, it's about time we start thinking about how much power the president has and whether Congress can still hold him accountable 
. Newsflash: Trump's actions are not about stability or strong leadership; they're about his ego and control freak tendencies 
We need a more balanced approach, where Congress is truly holding Trump accountable for his actions. Otherwise, we're just setting up a recipe for disaster 
. And now, the Republicans have basically told Congress that they don't want to limit Trump's power? It's like they're putting party loyalty over what's best for America 
.
. It's time for us to come together as a country and have some real conversations about what it means to be a leader, and what we value most - is it power, or is it our safety and well-being? 