House Democratic veterans back moves to limit Trump's military authority
A group of 12 House Democratic military veterans have thrown their weight behind efforts to constrain Donald Trump's military authority, announcing they will support a War Powers Act resolution in response to the US president's go ahead for airstrikes on Iranian nuclear facilities.
The veterans – some of whom served in Iraq and Afghanistan – were strongly critical of Trump's decision to launch what they called 'preventive air strikes' without US congressional approval, drawing explicit parallels to the run-up to some of America's longest recent wars.
'Twenty years ago, in their rush to appear strong and tough, politicians – from both parties – failed to ask the hard questions before starting wars in Iraq and Afghanistan,' they wrote in a letter led by Representative Pat Ryan to Trump sent on Monday. 'We refuse to make those same mistakes.'
Their intervention comes as multiple war powers resolutions are gaining momentum on Capitol Hill, with the Senate minority leader, Chuck Schumer, pushing for a vote as early as this week to rein in the president's military actions. The veterans did not specify which measure they would support, as competing versions are being drafted by different Democratic factions alongside a bipartisan effort.
Related: America is sleepwalking into another unnecessary war | Eli Clifton and Eldar Mamedov
The War Powers Resolution of 1973 was enacted to limit the US president's ability to commit armed forces to fight abroad without congressional consent in the form of a vote.
Representatives Thomas Massie, a Kentucky Republican, and Ro Khanna, a California Democrat, have been championing one bipartisan resolution, while the ranking Democrats on the House foreign affairs, armed services and intelligence committees are preparing an alternative, according to Punchbowl News.
Democratic aides described the latter to the outlet as providing cover for members uncomfortable with backing the Massie-Khanna approach, though lawmakers will not be discouraged from supporting both measures.
The adamance against the legality of America's involvement has only intensified since Trump's Saturday night strikes on three Iranian nuclear sites, and the line from centrist to progressive Democrats has been to charge the president with executive overreach.
The New York representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez called for Trump's impeachment, describing the attacks as 'a grave violation of the constitution and congressional war powers', while the House minority leader, Hakeem Jeffries, accused the president of misleading Americans and dramatically increasing the risk of war.
For the 12 veteran House members, the issue cuts to the heart of their military oath.
'We all swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution. Article 1 Section 8 explicitly requires a vote by Congress to declare war,' they wrote, demanding clear answers about military objectives, estimated costs and potential American casualties before any escalation.
The signatories included representatives Gilbert Ray Cisneros Jr, Eugene Simon Vindman, Chris Deluzio, Jimmy Panetta and Ted Lieu.
Still, their letter walked a careful line on the broader Middle East conflict, labeling Iran as 'evil' and pledging continued support for Israel while warning against the strategic limitations of military action. 'While destroying nuclear sites may achieve initial tactical success, it far from guarantees longterm strategic victory,' they argued.
The best public interest journalism relies on first-hand accounts from people in the know.
If you have something to share on this subject you can contact us confidentially using the following methods.
Secure Messaging in the Guardian app
The Guardian app has a tool to send tips about stories. Messages are end to end encrypted and concealed within the routine activity that every Guardian mobile app performs. This prevents an observer from knowing that you are communicating with us at all, let alone what is being said.
If you don't already have the Guardian app, download it (iOS/Android) and go to the menu. Select 'Secure Messaging'.
SecureDrop, instant messengers, email, telephone and post
See our guide at theguardian.com/tips for alternative methods and the pros and cons of each.
The dispute has built on uncomfortable divisions within Trump's own party, most notably with conservative influencers and independent news media that lean to the right, with Massie and senator Rand Paul emerging as Congress's most vocal Republican critics of the Iran strikes.
But Trump has since escalated his rhetoric, posting on Truth Social about potential 'regime change' in Iran and asking: 'MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN, why wouldn't there be a Regime change??? MIGA!!!'
Congressional leaders have also expressed frustration over the administration's failure to provide adequate consultation before the weekend operation.
While Schumer received a call from Trump officials, he was reportedly not told which country would be targeted, and Jeffries 'could not be reached until after' the strikes had begun, according to the White House press secretary, Karoline Leavitt.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
26 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Iran admits U.S. strikes caused 'significant damage' to nuclear sites
June 27 (UPI) -- Iran officially acknowledged its nuclear sites had sustained "serious and significant damage" from U.S. air and missile strikes last weekend. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said that while the extent of the damage was still being assessed by the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, it was undeniable that the losses were substantial and that the country's nuclear facilities "have been seriously damaged." The admission by Araghchi in an interview with Iranian state television on Thursday came amid conflicting reports on the efficacy of the unprecedented military action launched by the United States against three nuclear sites on June 21. Earlier Thursday, Iranian leader Ayatollah Ali Khanamei claimed the opposite of his foreign minister, saying damage to the sites had been minimal and instead hailing the "damage inflicted" by Tehran's "victorious" retaliatory strike on the United States' Al-Udeid Air Base in Qatar on Monday. The administration of U.S. President Donald Trump has said the strikes using 30,000-pound bunker-buster bombs and long-range Tomahawk cruise missiles "completely and fully obliterated" Iran's nuclear program -- although public briefings have focused on the "primary site," a key underground uranium enrichment plant at Fordow, with few details forthcoming on the facilities at Natanz and Esfahan. U.S. officials have pushed back on a leaked preliminary report by the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency that assessed the strikes had only set back Iran's nuclear development by a few months at most, with the White House calling its findings "flat-out wrong." Araghchi said inspectors from the United Nations' nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency, might never be allowed back into Iran. Iranian lawmakers passed a bill Wednesday, effectively banning any future cooperation with the IAEA, which Tehran has accused of carrying out reconnaissance on behalf of Israel and the United States. The legislation has been waived through by the Guardian Council and will go forward to President Masoud Pezeshkian's desk for him to sign into law, or veto. "Without a doubt, we are obliged to enforce this law. Iran's relationship with the agency will take a different shape," Araghchi warned. The independent London-based Iran International said Tehran was considering quitting the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. However, Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei on Thursday, reasserted Iran's right to pursue peaceful nuclear development afforded to it by the treaty, according to state-run Press TV. Citing Article IV of the 1968 agreement, he said Iran was determined to keep its nuclear program going "under any circumstances." The statement came a day after Trump, announcing fresh Iran-U.S. talks, said he wasn't interested in existing or new agreements because the only thing the U.S. would be asking for was "no nuclear." Araghchi took to social media to claim Iran had conducted itself honorably and abided by international diplomatic norms, contrasting its record against that of European countries and the United States in particular, accusing Washington of treachery for attacking when Iran-U.S. talks were still in play. "Our diplomatic legitimacy was undeniable. In every conversation I had with foreign ministers, they either approved Iran's rightful position or were forced into silence. We stood firm, and even adversaries acknowledged our position," he said in a post on X. "We have had a very difficult experience with the Americans. In the middle of negotiations, they betrayed the negotiation itself. This experience will certainly influence our future decisions." Araghchi confirmed no resumption of talks was planned despite Trump saying Wednesday that the two countries would meet "next week." White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters at her regular briefing Thursday that nothing was "scheduled as of now," but that communication channels between the United States and Iran remained active.


The Verge
30 minutes ago
- The Verge
Trump's T1 phone drops its ‘Made in the USA' promise.
Trump's T1 phone drops its 'Made in the USA' promise. This week on The Vergecast , we revisited how the flagship Trump Mobile phone suddenly swapped out its 'Made in the USA' claim for 'Designed with American values in mind.' We already had our guesses about who might really make the T1, but with new specs and screen size, we might have to do another round of investigation.
Yahoo
31 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Is Chinese history repeating itself in the US?
Scholars and commentators in both the US and China are drawing comparisons between the early months of President Donald Trump's second term and communist dictator Mao Zedong's Cultural Revolution. But some believe the way of Mao is unlikely to take root in America. CNN's Kristie Lu Stout explores the similarities and differences between the two leaders.