Senate panel plans July briefing on war authorization repeal

The Senate Foreign Relations Committee will hold a briefing in July on repealing the 2002 authorization for the Iraq War, its chairman said Tuesday.

The announcement from Chairman Bob Menendez (D-N.J.) comes after a group of Republicans on the committee asked him to delay consideration of a bill to repeal the 2002 and 1991 authorizations for the use of military force (AUMF) until administration officials appear before the committee.

“The administration has already issued a formal statement of administration policy, or SAP, supporting repeal of the 2002 AUMF,” Menendez said Tuesday at a committee business meeting. “Nonetheless, I am planning a member’s briefing for the beginning of the July work period, so we will all have an opportunity to hear directly from the administration and to question State and Defense Department officials concerning the proposed repeal.”

Menendez also said he and his staff would “facilitate discussions with the administration” for interested members.

The committee had originally been scheduled to consider a bill Tuesday from Sens. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) and Todd Young (R-Ind.) that would repeal both the 2002 AUMF for the Iraq War and the 1991 AUMF for the Gulf War.

But on Monday, five Republicans on the committee sent a letter to Menendez asking him to delay the vote until the panel holds a public hearing and classified briefing with administration officials.

In the letter, the Republicans argued there are “weighty questions” associated with repealing the 2002 AUMF that need answers.

“We believe it is critical that every member of this committee fully understand the scope and use of existing legal authorities, the current threats to the U.S. and its allies and partners, and the implications for our national security and foreign policy,” GOP Sens. Mitt Romney (Utah), Mike Rounds (S.D.), Marco Rubio (Fla.), Ron Johnson (Wis.) and Bill Hagerty (Tenn.) wrote in the letter.

On Tuesday, Sen. Jim Risch (R-Idaho), the ranking member of the committee, said he also supported their request.

“I’m further concerned about the message that this repeal could send to the region,” Risch said at Tuesday’s meeting. “Indeed, I think that’s the most important thing that we’re doing when it comes to the 2002 AUMF because both sides agree that the existence of the AUMF probably doesn’t make that much difference when it comes to making a decision as to whether or not to use military force under certain circumstances.”

The Biden administration has come out in support of scrapping the 2002 AUMF, with the White House saying in a statement last week that it backs repeal because “the United States has no ongoing military activities that rely solely on the 2002 AUMF as a domestic legal basis, and repeal of the 2002 AUMF would likely have minimal impact on current military operations.”

But opponents of repealing the 2002 measure argue doing so could hamstring U.S. counterterrorism missions, saying it should not be repealed until a replacement for a separate 2001 AUMF is agreed to.

While the 2002 authorization has occasionally been cited to bolster legal arguments in the fight against ISIS, it has been secondary to the 2001 one, which was passed in the wake of the 9/11 attacks to authorize the war in Afghanistan and war on terror.

Proponents of repealing the 2002 AUMF, as well as the 1991 one, argue the authorizations long ago served their purposes and that keeping them on the books leaves them prone to abuse by the executive branch.

They also see repealing those measures as a first step in a broader effort to claw back presidential war powers, including replacing the 2001 AUMF with a narrower authorization.

The House voted last week to repeal the 2002 AUMF, and Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) vowed to hold a vote in his chamber this year.