Senate pushes back on Trump's military threats against Venezuela with
war powers vote
[January 09, 2026]
By STEPHEN GROVES and JOEY CAPPELLETTI
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Senate advanced a resolution Thursday that would
limit President Donald Trump’s ability to conduct further attacks
against Venezuela, sounding a note of disapproval for his expanding
ambitions in the Western Hemisphere.
Democrats and five Republicans voted to advance the war powers
resolution on a 52-47 vote and ensure a vote next week on final passage.
It has virtually no chance of becoming law because Trump would have to
sign it if it were to pass the Republican-controlled House. Still, it
was a significant gesture that showed unease among some Republicans
after the U.S. military seized Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro in a
surprise nighttime raid over the weekend.
Trump’s administration is now seeking to control Venezuela’s oil
resources and its government, but the war powers resolution would
require congressional approval for any further attacks on the South
American country.
“To me, this is all about going forward,” said Missouri Sen. Josh
Hawley, one of the five Republican votes. “If the president should
determine, ‘You know what? I need to put troops on the ground of
Venezuela,’ I think that would require Congress to weigh in.”
The other Republicans who backed the resolution were Sens. Rand Paul of
Kentucky, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Susan Collins of Maine and Todd
Young of Indiana.
Trump reacted to their votes by saying on social media that they “should
never be elected to office again" and that the vote “greatly hampers
American Self Defense and National Security.”
Democrats had failed to pass several such resolutions in the months that
Trump escalated his campaign against Venezuela. But lawmakers argued now
that Trump has captured Maduro and set his sights to other conquests
such as Greenland, the vote presents Congress with an opportunity.
“This wasn’t just a procedural vote. It’s a clear rejection of the idea
that one person can unilaterally send American sons and daughters into
harm’s way without Congress, without debate,” said Senate Democratic
leader Chuck Schumer of New York.
Lawmakers’ response to the Venezuela operation
Republican leaders have said they had no advance notification of the
raid early morning Saturday to seize Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores,
but mostly expressed satisfaction this week as top administration
officials provided classified briefings on the operation.
Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., who forced the vote on the resolution, said he
believes many Republicans were caught off guard by the outcome. He said
that Trump’s recent comments to The New York Times suggesting U.S.
oversight in Venezuela could last for years — combined with details
revealed in the classified briefings — prompted some lawmakers to
conclude that “this is too big to let a president do it without
Congress.”
The administration has used an evolving set of legal justifications for
the monthslong campaign in Central and South America, from destroying
alleged drug boats under authorizations for the global fight against
terrorism to seizing Maduro in what was ostensibly a law enforcement
operation to put him on trial in the United States.
Republican leaders have backed Trump.
“I think the president has demonstrated at least already a very strong
commitment to peace through strength, especially in this hemisphere,”
said Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D. “I think Venezuela got
that message loudly and clearly.”
A vote on a similar resolution in November narrowly failed to gain the
majority needed. Paul and Murkowski were the only Republicans voting in
favor then.
Young in a statement said he supported the operation to capture Maduro,
but was concerned by Trump's statements that his administration now
“runs” Venezuela.
“It is unclear if that means that an American military presence will be
required to stabilize the country,” Young said, adding that he believed
most of his constituents were not prepared to send U.S. troops to that
mission.
House Democrats were introducing a similar resolution Thursday.
[to top of second column]
|
Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., speaks to reporters about a war powers
resolution regarding Venezuela on Capitol Hill, Wednesday, Jan. 7,
2026, in Washington. (AP Photo/Mariam Zuhaib)
The rarely enforced War Powers Act
Trump criticized the Senate vote as “impeding the President’s
Authority as Commander in Chief” under the Constitution.
Presidents of both parties have long argued the War Powers Act
infringes on their authority. Passed in 1973 in the aftermath of the
Vietnam War — and over the veto of Republican President Richard
Nixon — it has never succeeded in directly forcing a president to
halt military action.
Congress declares war while the president serves as commander in
chief, according to the Constitution. But lawmakers have not
formally declared war since World War II, granting presidents broad
latitude to act unilaterally. The law requires presidents to notify
Congress within 48 hours of deploying forces and to end military
action within 60 to 90 days absent authorization — limits that
presidents of both parties have routinely stretched.
Democrats argue those limits are being pushed further than ever.
Some Republicans have gone further still, contending congressional
approval is unnecessary altogether.
Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, a close Trump ally
who traveled with the president aboard Air Force One on Sunday, said
he would be comfortable with Trump taking over other countries
without congressional approval, including Greenland.
“The commander in chief is the commander in chief. They can use
military force,” Graham said.
Greenland may further test the limits
Graham’s comments come as the administration weighs not only its
next steps in Venezuela, but also Greenland. The White House has
said the “military is always an option” when it comes to a potential
American takeover of the world’s largest island.
Republicans have cited Greenland’s strategic value, but most have
balked at the idea of using the military to take the country. Some
favor a potential deal to purchase the country, while others have
acknowledged that is an unlikely option when Denmark and Greenland
have rejected Trump's overtures.
Democrats want to get out in front of any military action and are
already preparing to respond. Arizona Sen. Ruben Gallego said he
expected soon to introduce a resolution “to block Trump from
invading Greenland.”
Greenland belongs to a NATO ally, Denmark, which has prompted a much
different response from Republican senators than the situation in
Venezuela.
On Thursday, Sen. Roger Wicker, chairman of the Senate Armed
Services Committee, met with the Danish ambassador to the United
States, Jesper Møller Sørensen. Also in the meeting were the top
Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, New Hampshire
Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, and the head of Greenland's representation to
the U.S. and Canada, Jacob Isbosethsen.
“There’s no willingness on their part to negotiate for the purchase
or the change in title to their land which they’ve had for so long,”
Wicker, R-Miss., said afterward. “That’s their prerogative and their
right.”
Wicker added that he hoped an agreement could be reached that would
strengthen the U.S. relationship with Denmark.
“Greenland is not for sale,” Isbosethsen told reporters.
___
Associated Press writer Steven Sloan contributed to this report.
All contents © copyright 2026 Associated Press. All rights reserved |
