Senate Votes Against War Powers Resolution on Venezuela

Jan 15, 2026, 2:56 AM

Hover over text to view sources

In a significant political move, the Senate voted 51-50 on Wednesday to effectively block a war powers resolution aimed at preventing President Donald Trump from using military force in Venezuela without congressional approval. The resolution, which had initially gained bipartisan support, faced a dramatic reversal as two Republican senators changed their votes under pressure from the White House.

The resolution was co-sponsored by Senators Tim Kaine (D-Va.) and Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and sought to require Trump to seek prior approval from Congress before engaging in military actions against Venezuela. Last week, Senators Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) and Todd Young (R-Ind.) had voted to advance the resolution, but both flipped their positions after receiving assurances from Secretary of State Marco Rubio that there were no US troops currently in Venezuela and that any future military operations would require congressional authorization.

The Senate was deadlocked at 50-50, prompting Vice President JD Vance to cast the tie-breaking vote that ultimately scuttled the resolution. This vote highlights the ongoing tension within the Republican Party regarding Trump's influence and the reluctance of some lawmakers to oppose him directly.

Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY), who supported the resolution, criticized the outcome, stating that it emboldens Trump to pursue a more aggressive military stance without accountability. He emphasized the need for Congress to assert its role in decisions regarding military force, arguing that the American public does not want troops sent into conflict without a thorough debate.

The resolution's defeat is seen as a reflection of the political climate in Washington, where many Republican lawmakers are hesitant to challenge Trump, especially as he ramps up his rhetoric regarding Venezuela and other nations. Trump's public pressure campaign against the five Republican senators who initially supported the resolution was noted as a significant factor in their decision to change their votes.

Despite the resolution's failure, critics of US military involvement in Venezuela view the debate as a partial victory, as it forced Congress to confront the issue. Cavan Kharrazian, a senior adviser at Demand Progress, remarked that the administration's efforts to kill the vote indicate a recognition of Congress's war powers authority when it is actively asserted.

The resolution aimed to direct the President to terminate the use of US Armed Forces for hostilities within or against Venezuela unless explicitly authorized by a declaration of war or specific authorization for military force. The procedural maneuvering that led to its defeat underscores the complexities of legislative processes and the influence of executive power in military matters.

As the political landscape continues to evolve, the implications of this vote may resonate beyond Venezuela, affecting how Congress engages with the executive branch on military actions in the future.

In summary, the Senate's decision to block the war powers resolution reflects the ongoing challenges of balancing presidential authority with congressional oversight in matters of military engagement. The outcome serves as a reminder of the significant influence Trump holds over Republican lawmakers and the complexities of US foreign policy in volatile regions like Venezuela.

Trump Claims Iran Executions 'Stopped' Amid Ongoing Protests

President Trump stated that he has been informed that executions in Iran have ceased, despite Iranian officials indicating plans for rapid trials and executions of detained protesters. The situation remains tense as the US considers its response to Iran's crackdown on dissent.

Supreme Court Allows Candidates to Challenge Election Laws

The US Supreme Court has ruled that candidates can legally challenge election laws before voting begins, a decision that may lead to an increase in pre-election lawsuits. The ruling, which stemmed from a case involving Illinois Rep. Michael Bost, establishes that candidates have a personal stake in the election rules that govern their races.

DOJ Interviews Democratic Lawmakers Over 'Illegal Orders' Video

The Department of Justice is investigating six Democratic lawmakers who appeared in a video urging military personnel to disobey illegal orders. The inquiry has drawn accusations of political harassment from the lawmakers, who assert they were merely restating legal principles.

Federal Judges Approve California's New Democratic Map for 2026

A federal three-judge panel has allowed California to implement a new congressional map designed to favor Democrats in the upcoming 2026 elections. The ruling, which comes after a voter-approved initiative, is seen as a significant victory for the Democratic Party amid ongoing redistricting battles across the country.

Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Congressman Bost's Election Challenge

The US Supreme Court has ruled 7-2 that Congressman Mike Bost can challenge Illinois election laws regarding mail-in ballots. The decision allows Bost's lawsuit to proceed, emphasizing candidates' rights to contest election regulations, though dissenting justices warn it may lead to an increase in frivolous lawsuits.