U.S. Senator John Curtis (R-Utah) released a video statement addressing his position on the Senate vote regarding S.J.Res.104, an Iran war powers resolution. In his remarks, Curtis explained the complexities surrounding the War Powers Resolution and how it impacts both Congress and the President’s authority in military matters.
Curtis reflected on the historical context of the War Powers Resolution, noting its passage in 1973 during a period of congressional frustration with presidential authority during wartime. He stated: “I was a very young man at the time of the Vietnam War, but in 1973, Congress was very frustrated with not just the current President, but several presidents before them. So, they passed the War Powers Resolution to rein in the President. In essence, in that resolution, they said a couple of things: one was that the President had to notify Congress; that they had to come back in 48 hours with specifics; that they had to keep us regularly updated through that whole process; and that within 60 days, the hostilities had to be ceased with a possible 30-day extension window that the President could operate in.”
He pointed out that despite Congress’s intention to limit presidential power through this law, successive presidents from both parties have used its provisions for extended military action without prior congressional approval. Curtis remarked: “So, while Congress intended for that to rein in the President, it’s actually been used—not just by this President—but literally almost every president since then, both Republican and Democrat, have taken advantage of this 60-day or 90-day window to use a lot of authority—by the way, that is also given to them in the Constitution.”
Curtis acknowledged ongoing tensions between Congress’s constitutional role to declare war and the President’s role as Commander-in-Chief: “While it might be a little unclear because Congress, in the Constitution, has the ability to declare war, the President, in the Constitution, is also the Commander-in-Chief. So there has been throughout…this tug and pull between Congress and the President.”
Addressing recent events involving Iran and their consequences for American service members and others involved in conflict zones, Curtis said: “The gravity of what’s happening over in Iran is huge. The loss of some service members’ lives…the destruction—I don’t think any of us take lightly here in Washington D.C.”
He further outlined his reasoning for opposing S.J.Res.104: “Yes, I wish I would have been consulted. I wish my vote would have been asked for before this. But the President did act within his legal bounds to do what he has done.” Curtis argued against halting current military actions abruptly: “The vote that we’re taking this afternoon would simply say ‘President you must stop immediately what you’re doing.’ Well imagine what that would do to our troops…imagine how families who lost their loved ones…would feel if we simply stopped and pulled away from what we’re doing.”
Curtis concluded by emphasizing support for continued discussion about balancing congressional oversight with executive action: “But I do welcome an ongoing thoughtful dialogue about this balance between Congress…and [the] President…to make sure we get that balance just right.”
