\n<\/p>\n
As Democrats try<\/span> to push forward legislation that would block further strikes on Iran, one measure advanced by House leadership could actually strengthen the Trump administration\u2019s justification for subsequent attacks, anti-war advocates warn.<\/p>\n House progressives on Wednesday were trying to reach a compromise with Democratic leaders that would curb further U.S. military involvement in Iran while satisfying concerns from pro-Israel members about American support for Israel\u2019s missile defense.<\/p>\n There are three different war powers resolutions in play in Washington. In the Senate, a resolution from Tim Kaine, D-Va., appears to be on track for a vote on Friday. In the House, however, Democrats remain sharply divided between two resolutions.<\/p>\n \u201cThere\u2019s no upside to advancing a competing War Powers Resolution. It\u2019s not just unnecessary \u2014 it\u2019s actively counterproductive,\u201d Cavan Kharrazian, a senior policy adviser at Demand Progress, said in a statement. \u201cThere\u2019s still time to reconcile this on the House side, and we hope an agreement can be reached to enable a strong vote with the best possible language.\u201d<\/p>\n The resolutions in both chambers face long odds, thanks to near-unanimous support from the majority Republicans for President Donald Trump\u2019s strikes.<\/p>\n Congressional Democrats are responding to Trump\u2019s strikes by pursuing a vote under the War Powers Act, the Vietnam War-era law designed to limit presidents\u2019 ability to launch military action abroad without congressional approval.<\/p>\n Kaine\u2019s initial resolution introduced last week directs Trump to halt hostilities against Iran, while making clear that the president can still defend the U.S. from imminent attack.<\/p>\n Kaine\u2019s resolution<\/a> has drawn support from Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y. It is expected to come to a voter later this week.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n Amid concerns from pro-Israel Democrats, Kaine said Tuesday that he was co-sponsoring an amendment to his resolution<\/a> with Sens. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., and Andy Kim, D-N.J.<\/p>\n The amendment is intended to continue to allow the U.S. to participate in Israeli missile defense. Pentagon officials said last April that the U.S. \u2014 not Israel \u2014 shot down most Iranian drones and missiles <\/a>during an Iranian attack.<\/a><\/p>\n \u201cThis amendment would leave no doubt that Senator Kaine\u2019s resolution would ensure that President Trump has to make the case to the American people for further action against Iran without constraining our ability to help defend the Israeli people from Iranian attacks,\u201d Kim said in a statement.<\/p>\n While most Senate Democrats appeared to have coalesced around Kaine\u2019s resolution, House Democrats remained split on Wednesday over how to respond to Trump\u2019s strikes.<\/p>\n Advocates last week said they were frustrated that Democratic leaders were not moving forward with a resolution as Trump publicly mulled attacking Iran. Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., teamed up with Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., to introduce a resolution<\/a>.<\/p>\n After the strikes were launched, three House Democratic committee ranking members introduced an alternative resolution<\/a> that its authors claim would also force Trump to cease hostilities with Iran. The sponsors are Reps. Jim Himes of Connecticut, Adam Smith of Washington, and Gregory Meeks of New York.<\/p>\n Anti-war advocates worry that the House leadership measure could actually wind up strengthening Trump\u2019s justification for launching further strikes on Iran.<\/p>\n In an apparent nod to Israel, the leaders\u2019 resolution would give the president the power to \u201cdefend the United States or an ally or partner of the United States from imminent attack.\u201d<\/p>\n Trump has already justified his strike on Iran as an act of \u201ccollective self-defense of our ally, Israel,\u201d according to a letter <\/a>he sent Congress, despite the assessment of U.S intelligence agencies that Iran was not building a nuclear weapon<\/a>.<\/p>\n Critics say the House Democratic leadership resolution mirrors the language of Trump\u2019s justification far too closely.<\/p>\n \u201cWe think if it passes, it would be worse than not having a war powers resolution.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<\/figure>\n \u201cWe think if it passes, it would be worse than not having a war powers resolution,\u201d said Yasmine Taeb, the legislative and political director for the Muslim advocacy group MPower Change. \u201cThis war powers resolution gives the impression that the president has broad authority to be able to engage in military offensive action with respect to Iran \u2014 if Israel is asking us to.\u201d<\/p>\n Spokespersons for Himes, Meeks, and Smith\u2019s offices did not immediately comment.<\/p>\n Khanna has said that his resolution is intended to preserve the U.S. military\u2019s ability to participate in Israeli missile defense. Advocates said they understood there were ongoing discussions about a compromise. The two sides have ample time: A vote on the measure is not expected to come to the floor before mid- to late-July.<\/p>\n Whether or not the two sides come to an accord, however, the push to respond to Trump\u2019s strikes could face serious pushback from Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson.<\/p>\nSenate Goes First<\/h2>\n
House Hurdles<\/h2>\n
\n