Follow us on social

google cta
Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.)

Senate vote fails to block Trump attacks on Venezuela

Despite concerns about Caribbean sea strikes’ legality, Republicans fell in line

Reporting | QiOSK
google cta
google cta

This evening, the Senate narrowly voted down a War Powers Resolution that would have blocked the U.S. from attacking Venezuela without congressional approval amid fears the Trump administration’s ongoing campaign against so-called “narco-terrorists” might escalate into a greater conflict with the South American country.

Senators largely voted along party lines to block the resolution, led by Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.), and co-sponsored by 15 other senators, including one Republican, Sen. Rand Paul (R.-Ky.), which ultimately failed in a 49-51 vote. Paul and Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R.-Ala.) were the lone Republicans to vote for the resolution, just as they were the only Republicans to support a previous War Powers Resolution barring unauthorized strikes on boats purportedly carrying illegal drugs in the Caribbean, which also failed.

All Democratic senators voted for the measure, including Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.), the only Democrat to vote against the failed resolution that aimed to block the boat strikes last month.

In the days leading up to the vote, Republican senators, including Todd Young (R-Ind.), Susan Collins (R-Maine), and Mike Rounds (R.-S.D.) had said they were still reviewing the Trump administration’s legal rationale for its attacks — signaling concerns about the administration’s approach. Despite previously wavering, these Senators held the party line.

The Trump administration asserts its ongoing strikes are legal because the boats it is targeting are smuggling illegal drugs into the U.S., and that the people operating them are terrorists. But the White House does not currently believe it has the legal authority to conduct strikes within Venezuela, according to a new report from CNN.

Lawmakers from both parties contend the Trump administration has not given them enough information about its attacks and their legality. On the Senate floor leading up to the vote, resolution supporters stressed that any future hostilities in the region — against these boats or Venezuela itself — must first receive explicit congressional approval.

"There is no more important thing for this Congress to do, than to reassert its responsibility — to accept our responsibility for the powers that were delegated to the United States Congress — particularly about whether we do or don't go to war," Sen. Peter Welch (D-Vt.) said this afternoon.

Many warned that the ongoing boat strikes could easily escalate into a full-blown war.

"These operations risk destabilizing the region and provoking direct confrontation with Venezuela. We could be stumbling into another open ended conflict without purpose or plan if the administration intends to escalate towards conflict with Venezuela,” Sen. Jack Reed (D- R.I). stressed. “Congress has a constitutional duty to declare and authorize such action.”

“We cannot sleepwalk into another war through incremental escalation while being kept in the dark,” he said.

And resolution co-sponsor Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) stressed service members’ lives were at risk, for a possible conflict he deemed “unnecessary.”

"We owe it to our service members to only send them into harm's way when vital American interests are at stake. Who is in charge of Venezuela does not constitute such an interest,” Sen. Paul said. "President Trump, do not allow the warmongers in Washington to drag you into an unnecessary war of choice."

Although they did not rule out possible future actions, Trump officials told lawmakers Wednesday it does not plan to strike Venezuela currently, and that it does not have a legal justification for attacks against land targets there. Trump has also reportedly expressed concerns about whether striking Venezuela will compel its leader, Nicolas Maduro, to step down.

Connor Echols contributed additional reporting.


Top Image Credit: Screen grab via senate.gov
google cta
Reporting | QiOSK
Marco Rubio Munich Security Conference
Top photo credit: U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio waves, next to Chairman of the Munich Security Conference Wolfgang Ischinger, as he gets a standing ovation after his speech at the Munich Security Conference in Munich, Germany, Saturday, Feb. 14, 2026. Alex Brandon/Pool via REUTERS

Rubio's spoonful of sugar helps hard medicine go down in Munich

Europe


U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio arrived in the Munich Security Conference this weekend to sooth transatlantic anxieties. After Vice President J.D. Vance's criticisms of the old continent in 2025, the European dignitaries were looking for a more conventional American performance.

What they got was a peculiar mix of primacist nostalgia and civilizational foreboding, with an explicit desire to forge a path of restoration together.

keep readingShow less
Viktor Orban Peter Magyar
Top photo credit: Viktor Orbán (shutterstock/photoibo) and Peter Magyar (Shutterstock/Istvan Csak)

Could this be the election that brings Hungary's Orban down?

Europe

With two months remaining before the April 12 parliamentary elections, Hungary’s Prime Minister Victor Orban and his Fidesz party face by far their toughest challenge since winning power in 2010.

Many polls show challenger Peter Magyar’s Tisza (Respect and Freedom) party with a substantial lead. Orban’s campaign has responded by stressing his international clout, including close relations with U.S. President Donald Trump, and the prominent role he plays among right-populist Eurosceptics in Europe.

keep readingShow less
Trump hasn't bombed Iran yet. He must be reading these polls.
Top photo credit: Members of the media raise their hands to ask questions as U.S. President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (not pictured) hold a joint press conference in the State Dining Room at the White House in Washington, D.C., U.S., September 29, 2025. REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst TPX IMAGES OF THE DAY

Trump hasn't bombed Iran yet. He must be reading these polls.

Middle East

When the George W. Bush administration invaded Iraq in March 2003, that war had 72% support among Americans, according to Gallup.

If Donald Trump now wants to start a U.S. war with Iran, the president would not remotely enjoy that level of support. He doesn’t even have half of it. Scratch that, not even a quarter of Americans want him to bomb Iran today.

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.