Democrats Sound Alarm About Trump Effort to Obtain Backdoor War Authorization 

Experts have for months been telling TPM that any vote by Congress to fund President Donald Trump’s war in Iran could end up being construed under the law as a passive approval by the legislature of a war it did not greenlight — as has happened with past conflicts.

And as Republicans tee up votes on various aspects of war funding, Democrats are sounding the alarm.

Rep. Sara Jacobs (D-CA), a member of the House Armed Services Committee, told reporters on Thursday she thinks providing money for the ongoing Iran war — which the Trump administration waged without any authorization from Congress — would be a backdoor way to get congressional lawmakers to authorize the war.

“In my opinion, asking us for more money is a trap to get Congress on record approving of this war in a backdoor way — besides a war powers resolution,” Jacobs, who is also a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, told reporters at the House steps. “We should not take that bait. That is not a vote for our troops. That is a vote for a forever war.”

“The Pentagon this past year had an almost $1 trillion budget,” she said. “They do not need 200 extra billion dollars. In the One Big Beautiful Bill (OBBB) there was a $25 billion account for munitions. Almost none of that has been obligated. They should be using the money they already have before they come back asking us for more.”

Presidents have historically used funding that Congress passed after they started unauthorized conflicts to argue that their actions are retroactively legal, such as during President Bill Clinton’s 1999 operation in Kosovo. In the wake of that operation, the DOJ’s Office of Legal Counsel argued that Congress’ “emergency supplemental appropriation for military operations in Kosovo constituted authorization for continuing hostilities,” allowing the campaign to continue without explicit congressional approval beyond the 60-day time limit set by the War Powers Resolution.  

In his budget request, which was released Friday, Trump already asked Congress to give the Department of Defense a $1.5 trillion budget — formally requesting $350 billion to be approved through the budget reconciliation process — for the upcoming fiscal year that starts in October. Budget reconciliation bills only require 50 votes in the Senate, allowing Republicans to pass the legislation without needing Democratic support. 

If Trump’s request is approved, it would be the largest boost to the military’s budget in modern history, not counting the times the U.S. was involved in a war with boots on the ground.

The defense request for reconciliation exceeds the previous reports that the Pentagon was seeking over $200 billion in additional emergency funding for the Iran war.

The Pentagon also has billions to spend from last year’s OBBB, which included many defense-related provisions. In March, TPM reviewed a declassified spending plan that the Pentagon recently provided to Congress, which showed that, as of February, the Pentagon had billions in congressionally appropriated dollars to spend on munitions and supply chain development related to missile defense and other similar issues.

The Trump White House could also use their general transfer authority, which provides $6 billion of flexibility, to move around their current base defense budget. In fact, last month, they tapped into the general transfer authority and sent Congress a request to move $1.56 billion to replenish stocks, according to documents obtained by TPM. All the munitions that the request included are in use in the ongoing operation against Iran.

“It’s not something I would vote for at this point either way,” Rep. Glenn Ivey (D-MD), a member of the House Appropriations Committee, told TPM when asked if he thinks approving a supplemental for the Iran war would be a backdoor way to authorize the Iran war.

When further pressed on the same question Ivey told TPM “possibly.”

“I think the key point is to make sure that we use our power of the purse to rein this in,” Ivey continued. “I think we need to end the war as quickly as possible. The cease fire, at least on paper, was a good step, but I think he’s given away a lot. He’s lost a lot of our leverage in the way he’s gone about this.”

Sen. Angus King (I-ME) also previously weighed in on the issue, telling NOTUS in March that emergency funding for the Iran war “implicitly is an authorization, which I’m not prepared to support.”

Experts have repeatedly echoed that same view to TPM.