WASHINGTON — The Senate is expected to vote on a resolution Thursday that would limit President Donald Trump’s ability to conduct further attacks against Venezuela, setting up a test for his expanding ambitions in the Western Hemisphere.
The war powers resolution would require Trump to get congressional approval before striking Venezuela again, and it comes after the U.S. military seized the president of the South American country, Nicolás Maduro, in a surprise nighttime raid and as Trump’s administration is seeking to control Venezuela’s oil resources and its government.
Democrats have failed to pass several such resolutions in the months that Trump escalated his campaign against Venezuela. But lawmakers argued that now that Trump has captured Maduro and set his sights to other conquests such as Greenland, the vote presents the Republican-controlled Congress with an opportunity.
“It’s time for Congress to assert its control over military action of this kind, and it’s time to get this out of secrecy and put it in the light,” said Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., who forced the vote.
Republican leaders have said they had no advance notification of the raid early morning Saturday to seize Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, but mostly expressed satisfaction this week as top administration officials provided classified briefings on the operation.
The administration has used an evolving set of legal justifications for the monthslong campaign in Central and South America, from destroying alleged drug boats under authorizations for the global fight against terrorism to seizing Maduro in what was ostensibly a law enforcement operation to put him on trial in the United States.
Republican leaders have backed Trump.
“I think the president has demonstrated at least already a very strong commitment to peace through strength, especially in this hemisphere,” said Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D. “I think Venezuela got that message loudly and clearly.”
Lawmakers’ response to the Venezuela operation
Before the vote on the resolution, several Republicans said they were carefully considering their decision, including Sens. Susan Collins of Maine and Thom Tillis of North Carolina, who have previously voted against similar measures.
“We have a history of going in, liberating and leaving. I’m interested in the leaving part,” Tillis said.
Asked whether he would support putting troops on the ground in Venezuela, he responded: “Not without congressional authorization.”
“With Maduro rightfully captured, the circumstances have now changed. While I support the operation to seize Nicolas Maduro, which was extraordinary in its precision and complexity, I do not support committing additional U.S. forces or entering into any long-term military involvement in Venezuela or Greenland without specific congressional authorization,” Collins said in a Thursday morning statement.
“The resolution I have supported today does not include any language related to the removal operation. Rather, it reaffirms Congress’s ability to authorize or limit any future sustained military activity in Venezuela, while preserving the President’s inherent Article II authority to defend the United States from an armed attack or imminent threat. I believe invoking the War Powers Act at this moment is necessary, given the President’s comments about the possibility of ‘boots on the ground’ and a sustained engagement ‘running’ Venezuela, with which I do not agree.”
A vote on a similar resolution in November narrowly failed to gain the majority needed for passage. Sens. Rand Paul of Kentucky and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska were the only Republicans voting in favor.
Paul, an outspoken proponent of war powers resolutions, acknowledged that Maduro is seen as a “bad guy” and “a socialist and an autocrat.” But, Paul added, “The question is about who has the power to take the country to war?”
Some progressive Democrats have suggested inserting language in a defense appropriations bill to limit certain military actions, but that idea met resistance from more pragmatic members of the caucus. Democratic leaders have tried to cast Trump’s foreign ambitions as a distraction from the issues that voters face at home.
“The American people are asking what the hell is going on in Venezuela and why is this president, who campaigned on ‘America First,’ now spending all his time and energy on escapades overseas?” Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer of New York said in a floor speech.
The rarely enforced War Powers Act
Congress was once again left in the dark during the military operation in Venezuela, with Trump later confirming that he talked to oil executives but not leaders on Capitol Hill. That reflects a broader pattern in Trump’s second term, unfolding under a Republican-controlled Congress that has shown little appetite for reasserting its constitutional authority to declare war.
Under the Constitution, Congress declares war while the president serves as commander in chief. But lawmakers have not formally declared war since World War II, granting presidents broad latitude to act unilaterally.
Congress attempted to rein in that authority after the Vietnam War with the War Powers Resolution, passed over Republican President Richard Nixon’s veto. The law requires presidents to notify Congress within 48 hours of deploying forces and to end military action within 60 to 90 days absent authorization — limits that presidents of both parties have routinely stretched.
Democrats argue those limits are being pushed further than ever. Some Republicans have gone further still, contending congressional approval is unnecessary altogether.
Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, a close Trump ally who traveled with the president aboard Air Force One on Sunday, said he would be comfortable with Trump taking over other countries without congressional approval, including Greenland.
“The commander in chief is the commander in chief. They can use military force,” Graham said.
Greenland may further test the limits
Graham’s comments come as the administration weighs not only its next steps in Venezuela, but also Greenland. The White House has said the “military is always an option” when it comes to a potential American takeover of the world’s largest island.
While Republicans have cited Greenland’s strategic value, most have balked at the idea of using the military to take the country, instead favoring a potential deal to purchase the country.
Democrats want to get out in front of any military action and are already preparing to respond. Arizona Sen. Ruben Gallego said he is working on a resolution “to block Trump from invading Greenland.”
“We must stop him before he invades another country on a whim,” Gallego wrote on X. “No more forever wars.”
Kaine also said Wednesday that a resolution on Greenland would soon be filed, in addition to Cuba, Mexico, Colombia and Nigeria.
Greenland belongs to a NATO ally, Denmark, which has prompted a much different response from Republican senators than the situation in Venezuela. Paul said Republicans discussed Trump’s plans for Greenland at their Wednesday luncheon and he heard “zero support” for taking military action to seize it.
Tillis, a co-chair of the Senate NATO Observer Group, used a Senate floor speech to criticize White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller for comments this week that the U.S. should take control of Greenland. Tillis said such remarks were “amateurish” and “absurd.”
“This nonsense on what’s going on with Greenland is a distraction from the good work he’s doing,” Tillis said of the president. “And the amateurs who said it was a good idea should lose their jobs.”
Story by Stephen Groves and Joey Cappalletti, Associated Press. BDN Reporter Leela Stockley contributed to this report.
STEPHEN GROVES and JOEY CAPPELLETTI
