On Wednesday, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) expressed his support for repealing the 2002 authorization for the use of military force (AUMF) that was used to invade Iraq in 2003.
“I strongly and fully support repealing the 2002 authorization for the use of military force in Iraq,” Schumer said. “It is my intention as majority leader to bring this matter to a floor vote this year.”
The House is expected to vote on repealing the 2002 AUMF this week, an effort led by Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA). Previous efforts to repeal the war authorization made it through the House but failed in the Senate. This time around, it appears the bill will pass both chambers as it has wide support from both Democrats and Republicans.
On Monday, the White House released a statement that said it supports repealing the 2002 AUMF since it would not change current US military operations. The current US wars in the Middle East use the 2001 AUMF, which was passed in the wake of the September 11th attacks.
The 2001 AUMF has been the most abused by US presidents and is used today to fight groups like ISIS that didn’t exist when the authorization was passed. In Congress, most proponents of reining in war powers want the 2001 AUMF to be replaced by a more narrowed-down version instead of repealing it altogether.
The renewed push in Congress to rein in the president’s war powers started in February after President Biden bombed Syria, although Biden did not cite an AUMF to justify the airstrikes. Instead, Biden cited Article II of the Constitution.
The 2002 AUMF was most recently cited by the Trump administration to justify the assassination of Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani, who was killed in Baghdad in January 2021 by a US drone strike.
“The 2001 AUMF has been the most abused by US presidents and is used today to fight groups like ISIS that didn’t exist when the authorization was passed. In Congress, most proponents of reining in war powers want the 2001 AUMF to be replaced by a more narrowed-down version instead of repealing it altogether.”
We’ll get rid of the 2002 AUMF “since it would not change current US military operations” but we want a more narrowed down version of the 2001 AUMF. So even though the 2002 AUMF was “narrowed down” to military force against Iraq and was abused(the assassinated general for one), how exactly is replacing the 2001 AUMF with a narrowed down hit list going to stop the abuse in the future. It’s obvious that any AUMF is going to be eventually abused so why not just rid ourselves of all AUMF’s and let congress do it’s job?
To keep the AUMF going , ISIS and other terrorist proxies had to be created. These proxies haven’t gone away , but are creating havoc across Africa, hindering development
Agreed. Remember all that, while they are actively planning to keep bombing Afghanistan even after they “leave” on a certain date in less than 3 months. I’ll believe it when I see it, IBIWISI. Insert image of Stevie Wonder (I love Stevie Wonder, by the way).
If he’s using the oath of office from Article II of the Constitution, “…preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the US from all enemies, foreign and domestic”, that’s an even bigger legal stretcher than AUMF.