Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relating to the duration of authorizations of the use of force.

Bill Number

H.J.Res. 159

Origin Chamber

House

Congress

119th Congress, Session 2

Policy Area

Government Operations and Politics

Status

Introduced

Latest Action

2026-04-22: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.

Last Updated

2026-04-27T22:13:20Z

AI-Generated Summary

Purpose

This joint resolution (H.J. Res. 159) proposes a constitutional amendment to limit the duration of congressional authorizations for U.S. military force abroad, unless accompanied by a formal declaration of war. It aims to prevent indefinite military engagements authorized by Congress.

Key Provisions

• Applies only to Acts of Congress after the amendment's ratification.
• Targets authorizations for military force outside the United States where no declaration of war is in effect.
• Such authorizations automatically expire on the earlier of:
• Five years from the date of enactment, or
• A termination date specified in the Act itself.
• Requires two-thirds approval in both the House and Senate to propose, and ratification by three-fourths of state legislatures within seven years.

Significant Changes to Existing Law

• Current law allows Authorizations for Use of Military Force (AUMFs), like those post-9/11, to remain in effect indefinitely without a sunset clause.
• This amendment introduces a mandatory five-year limit on future AUMFs (excluding declarations of war), forcing periodic congressional reapproval.

Potential Impacts

• Government agencies: The executive branch (President and Department of Defense) would need to seek reauthorization every five years for ongoing operations, potentially disrupting long-term military planning.
• Citizens: Could lead to more congressional debate on military actions, increasing oversight but possibly delaying responses to threats.
• International relations: Might signal U.S. commitment limits to allies or deter adversaries by making sustained operations less certain.

Main Stakeholders Affected

• Congress: Gains stronger control over military engagements through required renewals.
• President and executive branch: Loses flexibility for prolonged force authorizations without war declarations.
• U.S. military: Faces operational uncertainties from expiring mandates.
• State legislatures: Must vote on ratification.
• U.S. citizens and taxpayers: Indirectly affected via debates on war powers and funding.

Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications

• Constitutional: Shifts balance of war powers from Article II (President as Commander-in-Chief) toward Article I (Congress's power to declare war), addressing debates over "forever wars."
• Legal: Does not retroactively affect existing AUMFs; only future ones. Challenges could arise over what constitutes an "authorization of force."
• Political: Heightens partisanship in military policy; ratification is a high bar (historically rare for amendments), introduced in the 119th Congress (2026) by Reps. Barrett and Golden, referred to Judiciary Committee.

This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.

Sponsor

Rep. Barrett, Tom [R-MI-7]

Cosponsors (1)

Rep. Golden, Jared F. [D-ME-2]

Recent Actions

• 2026-04-22: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
• 2026-04-22: Introduced in House
• 2026-04-22: Introduced in House

Bill Versions

• Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relating to the duration of authorizations of the use of force. — issued 2026-04-22 — PDF (2 pages)