In a party-line vote, the House Foreign Affairs Committee advanced the War Powers Act challenge to the US involvement in the war in Yemen. Having advanced through committee, it will face a floor vote later this month, where it is expected to easily pass.
The War Powers challenge notes that Congress never authorized US
military involvement in the Saudi-invasion of Yemen. The resolution
would demand an end to the US participation in the unauthorized war.
The Senate is also considering an identical resolution. The Senate
passed the resolution in December, but with a new Congress taking over
in January, there will need to be a re-vote. President Trump has
threatened to veto the bill.
This makes the final votes this year in the House and the Senate more
important, because it potentially sets the stage for overriding a Trump
veto. It’s not clear how close an override attempt might be, but since
the Saudi assassination of Jamal Khashoggi, a number of previously
pro-war lawmakers have switched sides, and are supporting ending the
Yemen War.
Maximizing support for the votes is still important, however,
particularly if there is to be a veto override. While there is not a
timetable for the votes as of yet, those wishing to call their
legislators should do so. House member’s contact information can be
found here. The
House version of the bill is HJ Res 37. The Senate version is SJ Res 7,
and your Senators can be reached by calling the Capitol switchboard at
(202) 224-3121.
Last 5 posts by Jason Ditz
- US Envoy Elliott Abrams Heads to Colombia to Oversee Aid Delegation - February 22nd, 2019
- Officials Say Hundreds of ISIS Fled Syria Into Iraq in Past Six Months - February 22nd, 2019
- Abe Says Japan Will Ignore Okinawan Referendum on US Base - February 22nd, 2019
- Civilian Convoy Leaves Last ISIS Territory in Eastern Syria - February 22nd, 2019
- UN Watchdog Again Confirms Iran in Compliance With P5+1 Nuclear Deal - February 22nd, 2019
More elaborate shows. Yemen victims of war were of no interest to anyone until relationships with Saudi Arabia soured. And they started going South since June 2017, when bia palace coup US favorite, MbNayaf was removed from the position of Crown Prince and the Head of Government, and MbS elevated to Crown Prince. And things went from bad to worse, until the very elaborate murder of journalist by Saudi assasins sent to Turkey for the mission. As MbS was declared responsible right away — it started to look right away as an incident that was meant to topple MbS. The displeasure coming from Congress, the media circus of macabre murder, as wrll as incessant pirtrayal of starving Yemeni children — kept media preocupied.
And then, MbS gets support from Saudi Allegiance Council, cknsolidates power in Intellugence, foreign affairs and military —- and suddenly decibels got reduced in Washington.
MbS — in short, won. He had all the information he needed from Turkey to trace not just those who were jnvolved, but through them, thise that were behind the “incident”. Any further escalation would degrade relationship with Saudis even further.
But what is our problen with Saudis? There are many — but Yemen in particular. Is Congress really going to ask that US Navy lifts blockade of Hodeidah? Hunger and no medications is the consequence of our blockade. When we stop it — I will believe in change. So, what is it that we want out of Yemen? Right to station our military in Yemen, in order to be able to close Bab al Mandeb. Precisely what Saudis, Sudan and Egypt do not want. Saudis ln the other hand want the region to solve the crusis, and have regional guarantors of peace.
For as long as US wants a piece of Yemen — a controljng influence — no resolutions will solve anything.
The Democrats are saying no to at least one war; that’s good news and worth supporting anyway.
They may only be doing it to defy Trump, but still a welcome move by the Democrats anyway.
Yemen is an ugly war even as proxy wars go, even as Kashoggi’s murder was ugly even as political murders go.
House dems move to end the war in Yemen so Pelosi and Schiff can focus on the new civil war they favor in Venezuela.
I don’t understand why this is subject to a veto. Isn’t Congress saying that the war was never authoried? Basically, they are pointing out that military action should never have begun and should therefore immediately cease. They are stopping an unauthorized act. This should not be subject to a veto.
What needs to happen is a group of Reps/Senators going to the Supreme Court and claiming a violation of the War Powers Resolution. Any legislation is subject to veto. But it shouldn’t take legislation to stop the president from breaking the law.
Kucinich led a group of congressional in a suit over the legality of both the war on terror, and Iraq war 2 to federal court. Lost, or, rather, was refused to be heard. Several other federal lawsuits were brought to challenge them as illegal on behalf of several stop loss victims, and other refuseniks from the military. All failed.
True.
But still, the way a president acting absent or contrary to congressional authorization is handled.
In theory, Congress legislates and the president executes. When he executes contrary to or in absence of legislation, it’s a legal, not legislative, matter. Passing another bill he can veto (and, if the veto is overridden, ignore) clearly won’t get the job done if he’s just giving Congress the finger and doing whatever he feels like.
Of course, there’s also the risk he might ignore SCOTUS, if they take the case and reverse him.
The antiwar case is going to require a lot more GOP support. This is a result of the horrible authorizations that were passed post 9/11. Some would have us think that trump was elected based on getting the US out of these wars, those people should inform the GOP.
The basis for the federal lawsuits was this…in both the war on terror, and Iraq 2 authorizations was written presidential “determination”. Essentially saying, although it is congress’ responsibility to pull the trigger, in these cases, they handed the gun to the executive to “determine” whether and when to pull the trigger. This determination clause was also the basis for all those congress people, including Clinton, to say they were “tricked” into voting for the authorization. BS…
Today, we can see the war on terror authorization attempting to go to work in Central/South America. The trump announcement that ME terrorists are in the “caravans” gives him license for deadly force in Mexico. There is no oversight to this determination. Then, we also have Pompeo’s announcement that Hezbollah is in Venezuela today. This announcement comes with a “terrorism” headline. Again, no system for oversight. This authorization needs not only to be closed out, but condemned by Congress.