Connect with us

Hi, what are you looking for?

News

Biden’s Strikes on New Middle East Targets Spark Bipartisan Anger in Congress

When candidate Joe Biden promised to unite the nation, this is probably not what he was referring to.

After the U.S. and other countries attacked Houthi rebel targets in Yemen Thursday with air strikes and missiles, House and Senate members on both sides of the aisle launched attacks of their own — on what they called the Biden administration’s unconstitutional use of force without congressional approval.

California Democratic Rep. Ro Khanna argued on X that, despite being a member of Biden’s party, he would not support what he considered the president’s unconstitutional actions.

“The President needs to come to Congress before launching a strike against the Houthis in Yemen and involving us in another middle east conflict,” Khanna wrote in his X post. “That is Article I of the Constitution. I will stand up for that regardless of whether a Democrat or Republican is in the White House.”

To be clear, it’s likely that Biden’s authorization of the strikes against the Houthis were in compliance with federal law, which allows the president to order attacks without congressional approval if U.S. forces have been attacked first. However, there is some argument about how and when those rules apply, and whether they are applicable here.

Regardless, Utah’s Sen. Mike Lee reached across the aisle to agree with his Democratic House colleague.

“I totally agree with @RoKhanna,” he wrote in a re-post of Khanna’s comments. “The Constitution matters, regardless of party affiliation.”

Rep. Anna Paulina Luna agreed with both of them.

“Exactly. We did not declare war,” the Florida Republican wrote. “Biden needs to address Congress!”

Rep. Mark Pocan didn’t quite go so far as to say that the Biden administration had violated the Constitution, but he did call for consultations with Congress.

“The United States cannot risk getting entangled into another decades-long conflict without Congressional authorization,” the Wisconsin Democrat wrote. “The White House must work with Congress before continuing these airstrikes in Yemen.”

Val Hoyle, another Democrat, went further, apparently accusing Biden of exceeding his presidential authority — so much further, in fact, that X added “context” to her post reminding users that Biden does, in fact, have authority to “initiate a military action” but is required to report to Congress within two days.

“These airstrikes have NOT been authorized by Congress,” the representative from Oregon wrote. “The Constitution is clear: Congress has the sole authority to authorize military involvement in overseas conflicts. Every president must first come to Congress and ask for military authorization, regardless of party.”

Not every legislator was against the strikes, of course, as Politico pointed out, and many called them “overdue.”

A number of Republicans came out in favor of the airstrikes, including Iowa’s Joni Ernst, South Carolina’s Lindsey Graham, Kentucky’s Mitch McConnell, Florida’s Rick Scott, and Mississippi’s Roger Wicker.

READ 9 COMMENTS
  • P Revere says:

    Biden’s actions were not an act of war. He did not attack a sovereign country or attempt to overthrow a foreign govt. His was a “police action” that fell within to role the US has assumed to protect international waterways and the int’l shipping therein. Shooting down the drones, fired by a vigilante group in Yemen, as well as destroying their launch sites, their means of firing those drones, falls within the scope of the POTUS’ assigned powers. They fired first, we responded. If the Houthis continue their attacks against int’l shipping, then greater actions should be addressed by both the US, the UN and even NATO. But for the moment, Joe’s actions were surely justified, and not beyond the scope of the POTUS powers.
    Congress should be distressed, but by the scope of the Houthi’s growing vigilantism, not by Joe’s response to it. But given this Congress’ acceptance, and even permittance, of this kind of rogue outlawism and their blatant opposition to the employment of any kind of law enforcement, this distress is not totally unexpected, but it is certainly unwelcome. As for Biden’s response to the Houthi’s vigilantism, Way to go, Joe! I still won’t vote for you, but for today, you earned that “Attaboy!”

  • Quasimodo 2020 says:

    Personaĺly I think this is all part of the plan elderly democrats have been working towards since the clinton administration. First allow tens of thousands of middle eastern military age men flood the southern border, then stir hard feelings towards the USA in muslim countries so that the threat of terrorist attacks inside the USA is at 100% and then install marshal law. No elections to remove them from power and bring the citizens to their knees with food and energy shortages and make them scared to leave their homes.

  • TOP STORIES

    News

    AT&T said the hourslong outage to its U.S. cellphone network Thursday appeared to be the result of a technical error, not a malicious attack....

    News

    The U.S. military is tracking yet another balloon over the western United States, a year after a Chinese spy balloon provoked a diplomatic crisis....

    News

    A journalist accused of leaking videos of former Fox News star Tucker Carlson was arrested in Florida on Thursday and hit with 14 federal...

    News

    An analysis of cell phone records submitted by former President Donald Trump’s legal team seeks to undercut claims from Fulton County District Attorney Fani...

    >