Trump to Ignore War Powers Act | Drudge Retort

Sunday, November 02, 2025

Trump to Ignore War Powers Act

War Powers Law Does Not Apply to Trump's Boat Strikes, Administration Says The move deepened the idea that a Vietnam-era law, which says congressionally unauthorized deployments into "hostilities" must end after 60 days, does not apply to airstrike campaigns.

Posted by truthhurts at 05:15 PM | 6 COMMENTS | permalink | Comment on This Entry |

More

Alternate links: Google News | Twitter

The Justice Department told Congress this week that President Trump could lawfully continue his lethal military strikes on people suspected of smuggling drugs at sea, notwithstanding a time limit for congressionally unauthorized deployments of armed forces into "hostilities."

In a briefing, the official who leads the department's Office of Legal Counsel, T. Elliot Gaiser, said the administration did not think the operation rose to the kind of "hostilities" covered by the 60-day limit, a key part of a 1973 law called the War Powers Resolution, according to several people familiar with the matter.

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

The absurdity of the regime's argument is beyond comprehension.

The WPA does not apply to them murdering civilians because is it not hostilities because essentially our troops are immune from response.

that argument says they could shoot an ICBM nuclear missile into Venezuela and that wouldn't be hostilities

To say nothing of the basis of their argument is that "narco-terrorists" are involved in hostilities by killing Americans

Thanks magat scum.

Our president is no longer beholden to congress to implement wars in even the smallest nominal way.

#1 | Posted by truthhurts at 2025-11-02 05:18 PM | Reply

And just so you understand, the WPA requires the president to come to Congress to get authorization for military force after 60 days of hostility.

IOW the WPA prohibits the president from further military action.

#2 | Posted by truthhurts at 2025-11-02 05:19 PM | Reply

"that argument says they could shoot an ICBM nuclear missile into Venezuela and that wouldn't be hostilities"

These are the same Republicans who said it isn't torture until it results in organ failure or death.

#3 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-11-02 05:21 PM | Reply

#1

These are the same Republicans who said it isn't torture until it results in organ failure or death.
#3 | POSTED BY SNOOFY

Interesting doing some research. Obama (Libya) and Clinton (Kosovo) did this similar side step with the same response. Kosovo and Libya had the military much more exposed than today.

"that argument says they could shoot an ICBM nuclear missile into Venezuela and that wouldn't be hostilities"

I didn't find any one making that claim for Clinton or Obama; For sure Obama would have benefited from this policy, as the US lost a F-15 in Libya due to malfunction;

But I did find this ...

President Bill Clinton didn't bother to get prior legislative permission for his Kosovo war and sidestepped the War Powers Resolution thereafter. And Mr. Obama hasn't lifted a finger in the last two months to get Congress's consent for his Libyan operation.

When Mr. Obama first announced the Libyan intervention along with our NATO allies, he claimed constitutional authority as chief executive and commander in chief and said he was acting "consistent with" the War Powers Resolution. Congress has shown no interest in authorizing our limited military operations, nor has it provided any funding. At this point, if the president were to seek approval, Congress would likely refuse.

www.aei.org

The administrations argued that the WPA's 60-day limit was not triggered because the mission constituted "kinetic military action" rather than full-scale "hostilities" involving a significant risk of U.S. casualties or ground troops.

I suppose it's bad when Trump does it but not when Obama and Clinton do it? Seems that is what the "brain trust" of TruthLies & Snoofy claim?

Do you guys research anything? I mean seriously this wasn't hard to find.

#4 | Posted by oneironaut at 2025-11-02 06:19 PM | Reply

BOTH SIDES

*drink*

#5 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2025-11-02 06:22 PM | Reply

I suppose it's bad when Trump does it but not when Obama and Clinton do it?

Is Trumps water heavy?

You would excuse anything the man did, because you voted for him, and your ego doesn't allow for you to be wrong.

#6 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2025-11-02 06:23 PM | Reply

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy