A joint resolution to direct the removal of United States Armed Forces from hostilities within or against Venezuela that have not been authorized by Congress.
- Bill Number
- S.J.Res. 98
- Origin Chamber
- Senate
- Congress
- 119th Congress, Session 1
- Policy Area
- International Affairs
- Status
- Introduced
- Latest Action
- 2026-01-14: Point of order that the measure is not entitled to expedited procedures under 50 U.S.C. 1546(a) raised against the measure agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 50 - 50. Record Vote Number: 9.
- Last Updated
- 2026-04-29T10:56:39Z
AI-Generated Summary
Purpose
This joint resolution, S.J. Res. 98, aims to assert Congress's constitutional authority over military actions by directing the President to end the use of U.S. Armed Forces in hostilities (armed conflicts) within or against Venezuela unless Congress explicitly authorizes it through a declaration of war or a specific law allowing military force.
Key Provisions
- Findings Section:
- Congress holds the exclusive power to declare war, as stated in Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution.
- No war has been declared against Venezuela, nor has Congress passed a specific law authorizing military force there.
- Any U.S. military involvement in Venezuela qualifies as "hostilities" under the War Powers Resolution (a 1973 law that requires the President to notify Congress of military actions and limits unauthorized engagements).
- The resolution invokes expedited procedures under existing laws (50 U.S.C. 1546a and related acts) to speed up its consideration in Congress, bypassing normal committee delays.
- Termination of Hostilities:
- The President must stop using U.S. forces for hostilities in or against Venezuela immediately, unless authorized by Congress.
- A "rule of construction" clarifies that this does not prevent the U.S. from defending itself against an actual or imminent armed attack.
Significant Changes to Existing Law
- This resolution does not amend laws directly but enforces the War Powers Resolution and related statutes more stringently for Venezuela-specific actions.
- It introduces a targeted mandate for withdrawal, which could set a precedent for Congress to use similar expedited processes to override executive military decisions without a full debate or vote on broader war powers reforms.
- Unlike general war powers laws, this is a specific, binding directive tied to Venezuela, potentially limiting presidential flexibility in foreign policy without congressional approval.
Potential Impacts
- Government Agencies: The Department of Defense and executive branch would need to withdraw forces from Venezuelan-related operations, potentially redirecting resources and altering military planning. The State Department might face challenges in diplomacy if military leverage is removed.
- Citizens: U.S. service members could be protected from unauthorized risks in Venezuela, reducing potential casualties or deployments. American taxpayers might see savings from scaled-back operations, though it could affect national security perceptions.
- International Relations: This could de-escalate U.S.-Venezuela tensions, signaling a congressional preference for non-military approaches to issues like sanctions or humanitarian aid. It might strain relations with allies expecting U.S. support against Venezuelan influence or encourage adversaries by limiting U.S. intervention options.
Main Stakeholders Affected
- Congress: Gains reinforced control over military decisions, with bipartisan support from over 30 senators (including Democrats and independents like Mr. Paul and Mr. Sanders).
- Executive Branch (President and Agencies): Directly compelled to act, potentially leading to conflicts between branches of government.
- U.S. Armed Forces: Personnel involved in Venezuelan operations would be required to disengage, affecting deployment and readiness.
- Venezuelan Government and Citizens: Could face reduced external military pressure, possibly easing internal conflicts but also limiting U.S. influence on human rights or regime change efforts.
- U.S. Citizens and Advocacy Groups: Impacts those concerned with foreign policy, such as anti-war organizations or Venezuelan-American communities advocating for or against intervention.
Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications
- Constitutional: Reinforces the separation of powers by upholding Congress's war-declaring authority against potential executive overreach, addressing debates over the President's role as Commander-in-Chief in undeclared conflicts.
- Legal: Relies on the War Powers Resolution, which has been controversial since its passage; success could validate expedited procedures (e.g., under 50 U.S.C. 1546a) for future resolutions, making it easier for Congress to check military actions quickly.
- Political: Demonstrates rare bipartisan cooperation on foreign policy restraint, introduced in the 119th Congress (2025-2026) amid concerns over unauthorized U.S. involvements abroad. If passed, it could spark veto fights or court challenges, highlighting tensions in U.S. interventionism without altering broader alliances or treaties.
This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.
Sponsor
Cosponsors (30)
Sen. Paul, Rand [R-KY], Sen. Schumer, Charles E. [D-NY], Sen. Schiff, Adam B. [D-CA], Sen. Gallego, Ruben [D-AZ], Sen. Merkley, Jeff [D-OR], Sen. Schatz, Brian [D-HI], Sen. Welch, Peter [D-VT], Sen. Duckworth, Tammy [D-IL], Sen. Van Hollen, Chris [D-MD], Sen. Blumenthal, Richard [D-CT], Sen. Sanders, Bernard [I-VT], Sen. Bennet, Michael F. [D-CO], Sen. Wyden, Ron [D-OR], Sen. Rosen, Jacky [D-NV], Sen. Markey, Edward J. [D-MA], Sen. Hirono, Mazie K. [D-HI], Sen. Murphy, Christopher [D-CT], Sen. Alsobrooks, Angela D. [D-MD], Sen. Booker, Cory A. [D-NJ], Sen. Gillibrand, Kirsten E. [D-NY], Sen. Luján, Ben Ray [D-NM], Sen. Baldwin, Tammy [D-WI], Sen. Cortez Masto, Catherine [D-NV], Sen. Kim, Andy [D-NJ], Sen. Heinrich, Martin [D-NM], Sen. Coons, Christopher A. [D-DE], Sen. Murray, Patty [D-WA], Sen. Peters, Gary C. [D-MI], Sen. Padilla, Alex [D-CA], Sen. Cantwell, Maria [D-WA]
Recent Actions
- 2026-01-14: Point of order that the measure is not entitled to expedited procedures under 50 U.S.C. 1546(a) raised against the measure agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 50 - 50. Record Vote Number: 9. (Roll call 9)
- 2026-01-14: Motion to proceed to consideration of measure made in Senate. (consideration: CR S218)
- 2026-01-08: Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 298.
- 2026-01-08: Senate Committee on Foreign Relations discharged by Yea-Nay Vote. 52 - 47. Record Vote Number: 5, by motion, pursuant to 50 U.S.C. 1546a. (Roll call 5)
- 2026-01-08: Senate Committee on Foreign Relations discharged by Yea-Nay Vote. 52 - 47. Record Vote Number: 5, by motion, pursuant to 50 U.S.C. 1546a. (Roll call 5)
- 2026-01-08: Motion to discharge Senate Committee on Foreign Relations made. (consideration: CR S100)
- 2025-12-03: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
- 2025-12-03: Introduced in Senate
Bill Versions
- To direct the removal of United States Armed Forces from hostilities within or against Venezuela that have not been authorized by Congress. — issued 2025-12-03 — PDF (3 pages)
- To direct the removal of United States Armed Forces from hostilities within or against Venezuela that have not been authorized by Congress. — issued 2026-01-08 — PDF (4 pages)