After President Donald Trump’s attack on Venezuela, Democrats publicly criticized him for starting a war without approval from Congress, while some Republicans privately expressed concern over a lack of prior notification.
The deployment of U.S. forces to the Caribbean had been ongoing for months and was not a secret, yet Congress had multiple opportunities to attempt to block military action before it occurred.
Since September, the Trump administration began striking alleged drug smugglers in the Caribbean. To date, four votes on resolutions seeking to halt unauthorized attacks – both on the boats and on Venezuelan soil – have failed to pass.
Lawmakers are now preparing for another Senate vote this week on a resolution intended to restrain further action.
“We have had the violation of international law, the U.N. charter, the violation of the territorial integrity of Venezuela, and the kidnapping of a sitting head of state, without going to Congress, without telling Congress beforehand,” said Heather Brandon-Smith, the legislative director of foreign policy for the Friends Committee on National Legislation. “Everything here is extraordinarily illegal, and Congress has a mechanism to stop it through voting for these war powers resolutions.”
Four Failed Votes
Members of Congress have each had two opportunities to vote on military action related to Venezuela, with two resolutions coming to a vote in both the House and Senate.
The first debate began on October 8, when Senators Adam Schiff, D-Calif., and Tim Kaine, D-Va., sponsored a resolution to block further strikes on alleged drug smuggling boats that began a month prior.
Only Senators Rand Paul, R-Ky., and Lisa Murkowski, R-Ala., voted in favor of the measure, while Senator John Fetterman, D-Pa., opposed it, breaking with his party.
Following this vote, the Trump administration assembled a significant military presence in the Caribbean. Administration officials maintained that their focus remained on disrupting boats, not overthrowing Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro.
On November 6, the Senate voted on a resolution to block an attack on Venezuela itself without congressional authorization. Fetterman voted for the resolution this time, but it still failed to garner sufficient Republican support beyond Paul and Murkowski.
On December 17, the House voted down two resolutions aimed at preventing both boat strikes and broader war with Venezuela. The resolution to block war failed on a largely party-line vote, with only three Republicans supporting it and Representative Henry Cuellar of Texas as the sole Democrat in opposition.
Even if these resolutions had passed both chambers, a veto from Trump remained a significant obstacle. Supporters argue, however, that passage would have sent a strong message to the White House.
“If they passed, they would have been seen as a major political defeat for Trump,” said Erik Sperling, the executive director of the nonprofit Just Foreign Policy. “It’s such an extraordinary action for Congress to get out ahead of a war by opposing it, especially when Congress and the American public are aligned against the war. That’s when it is the biggest political defeat for an administration, and the hardest to proceed with an unpopular war.”
“Rubio Explicitly Lied”
Some Republicans who voted against the resolutions may have relied on assurances from administration officials, including Secretary of State Marco Rubio, that the U.S. was not preparing for war.
“In a certain sense, they should have known, and they should have cast a clear vote against any kind of escalation,” Sperling said. “But in their defense, in both cases, the administration came to Congress, including Rubio, and promised they were not going to launch illegal strikes. In that sense, people could still claim that they were misled by Rubio.”
Ahead of the December 17 House vote, Rubio and Secretary of War Pete Hegseth told Congress they had no legal basis for launching war and were not planning to target Venezuela.
Representative Pat Ryan, D-N.Y., accused Rubio of deliberately misleading lawmakers.
“In the most recent classified briefing, which I was in, and happened right before Christmas, Marco Rubio personally, explicitly lied, to me and the Congress and to the people’s representatives,” Ryan told CNN. “We asked over and over, what is the larger plan — is there an effort at regime change being planned?”
Rubio denied lying to Congress, arguing that the attack on Venezuela, which resulted in casualties, was simply a “law enforcement operation.” Brian Finucane, a senior adviser at the International Crisis Group, dismissed this explanation.
“It’s just kind of a silly argument,” he said. “Because it was an invasion. The U.S. did go to war with Venezuela. Just because you drag along a couple DEA agents doesn’t transform this massive military operation as a whole into a law enforcement operation.”
One More Chance
Some Republicans reportedly feel misled by Rubio, according to Politico. GOP lawmakers will have another opportunity to publicly address their concerns this week when the Senate votes on a war powers resolution sponsored by Kaine.
“As with most things, it is going to come down to political will within Congress,” Finucane said, “particularly on the GOP side of the aisle.”
Kaine also intends to seek to cut off funding for military action against Venezuela through the annual War Department funding bill.
“It is long past time for Congress to reassert its critical constitutional role in matters of war, peace, diplomacy and trade,” Kaine said in a statement on Saturday. “We’ve entered the 250th year of American democracy and cannot allow it to devolve into the tyranny that our founders fought to escape.”
Frequently Asked Questions
What has been Congress’s response to the Trump administration’s actions in Venezuela?
Congress has held four votes on resolutions seeking to block unauthorized military action in Venezuela, all of which have failed. Lawmakers are preparing for another vote this week.
What is the argument being made about the legality of the administration’s actions?
Critics argue that the Trump administration violated international law, the U.N. charter, and the territorial integrity of Venezuela by launching attacks without congressional approval.
What role did Senator Marco Rubio play in the debate?
Representative Pat Ryan accused Senator Rubio of misleading Congress by assuring lawmakers that the administration was not planning a war with Venezuela.
Given the repeated failures of congressional resolutions to restrain executive action, what factors might influence the outcome of the upcoming Senate vote on war powers in Venezuela?
