Senate rejects bid to curb Trump’s military power in Caribbean
3 Min Read
The failed resolution follows recent US airstrikes near Venezuela, sparking legal concerns over Trump’s overreach to use force without congressional approval.
-
The Supreme Court is seen in the distance, framed through columns of the US Senate in Washington, Feb. 20, 2025 (AP)
The US Senate on Wednesday narrowly voted down a resolution seeking to restrict President Donald Trump’s authority to deploy military force against non-state groups in the Caribbean.
The measure, introduced under the War Powers Act by Democratic Senators Tim Kaine and Adam Schiff, failed by a vote of 48 to 51.
While most Democrats backed the proposal, Senator John Fetterman broke ranks to oppose it. Two Republicans, Senators Rand Paul and Lisa Murkowski, supported the measure, while Senator Ted Cruz did not cast a vote.
The vote followed a series of recent US airstrikes in the Caribbean Sea targeting vessels Washington claims were transporting illegal narcotics. At least four such strikes have been carried out in international waters near Venezuela in recent weeks.
Earlier on Wednesday, Colombian President Gustavo Petro said one of the vessels struck by US forces was Colombian.
Kaine and Schiff’s resolution sought to compel congressional debate and approval before any further military actions of this nature could proceed.
The proposal emphasized that drug trafficking alone “does not itself constitute an armed attack or threat of an imminent armed attack” that would justify the use of force under international law. It also stated that labeling a group as a foreign terrorist organization does not grant the president independent legal authority to initiate military operations.
Questions over Trump’s military authority
The US airstrikes off the Venezuelan coast are the latest examples of Trump’s increasingly aggressive use of military power without explicit congressional approval.
In September, Sen. Mark Kelly, a Democrat and former Navy pilot, questioned the legality of the operation. “I don’t know if this was legal or not,” he said, warning that US servicemembers could face legal jeopardy.
At the time, Democratic leaders, including Sen. Jack Reed, demanded full transparency from the administration. Reed warned that if Trump exceeded his constitutional authority, Congress must consider restricting funds for further unauthorized military operations.
The strikes, along with past moves such as dropping bombs on Iran’s nuclear sites and rebranding the Department of Defense as the Department of War, demonstrate Trump’s willingness to push the boundaries of presidential power.
While some Republicans see Trump’s approach as decisive leadership, others fear it erodes constitutional checks and balances. The result is an ongoing struggle within the GOP over whether America First should mean restraint abroad or aggressive use of military force.
Nonetheless, Democratic lawmakers remain firm in demanding explanations for the strike. They argue that the absence of legal clarity undermines both the rule of law and the safety of US forces carrying out such missions.
