S.J. Res. 98 (119th)Bill Overview

A joint resolution to direct the removal of United States Armed Forces from hostilities within or against Venezuela that have not been authorized by Congress.

International Affairs|International Affairs
Sponsor
Cosponsors
Support
Lean Democratic
Introduced
Dec 3, 2025
Discussions
Bill Text
Current stageIntroduced

Point of order that the measure is not entitled to expedited procedures under 50 U.S.C. 1546(a) against the measure agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 50 - 50. Record Vote Numbe…

Introduced
Committee
Floor
President
Law
Congressional Activities
01 · The brief

This joint resolution directs the President to terminate use of U.S. Armed Forces in hostilities within or against Venezuela unless Congress has declared war or provided specific statutory authorization.

It cites the War Powers Resolution and related statutes, and preserves a self-defense exception for armed attacks or imminent armed attacks.

The resolution invokes expedited consideration procedures under existing law for removal measures.

Passage30/100

Short, targeted directive faces strong institutional resistance and Senate procedural barriers despite modest fiscal impact.

CredibilityPartially aligned

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a concise substantive directive that clearly states the constitutional and statutory basis for requiring termination of U.S. military involvement in Venezuela absent congressional authorization, and it situates the measure within existing statutes governing expedited consideration. However, it provides minimal operational detail: it lacks timelines, definitional clarity, fiscal analysis, enforcement or reporting mechanisms, and handling of common edge cases.

Contention70/100

Progressives emphasize restoring Congressional authority and avoiding unauthorized wars.

02 · What it does

Who stands to gain, and who may push back.

Who this appears to help vs burden50% / 50%
Targeted stakeholdersTargeted stakeholders
Likely helped
  • Targeted stakeholdersReasserts Congress's constitutional authority to declare war and authorize significant military actions.
  • Targeted stakeholdersCould reduce U.S. combat exposure and potential military casualties in Venezuela-related operations.
  • Targeted stakeholdersMay limit unauthorized or unilateral military operations, increasing legislative oversight of force deployments.
Likely burdened
  • Targeted stakeholdersCould constrain the President's ability to respond rapidly to emergent threats in the region.
  • Targeted stakeholdersMay reduce U.S. deterrence posture, potentially encouraging adversary coercion or aggression.
  • Targeted stakeholdersCould complicate support, protection, or evacuation of U.S. partners, citizens, and missions in Venezuela.
03 · Why people split

Why the argument around this bill splits.

Progressives emphasize restoring Congressional authority and avoiding unauthorized wars.
Progressive85%

Likely supportive as a restoration of Congressional war powers and a check on unilateral military action.

Views the measure as reducing risk of unauthorized escalation in Latin America and encouraging diplomatic solutions and oversight.

Leans supportive
Centrist60%

Supportive in principle of restoring legislative authority, but cautious about operational and national security tradeoffs.

Would seek clearer definitions, timelines, and implementation details to avoid unintended strategic risks.

Split reaction
Conservative20%

Likely opposed as an undue constraint on the President's commander-in-chief authority and an operational handicap.

Views the resolution as potentially weakening deterrence and U.S. flexibility in responding to threats or protecting interests.

Likely resistant
04 · Can it pass?

The path through Congress.

Introduced

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Committee

Still ahead

Floor

Still ahead

President

Still ahead

Law

Still ahead

Passage likelihood30/100

Short, targeted directive faces strong institutional resistance and Senate procedural barriers despite modest fiscal impact.

Scope and complexity
52%
Scopemoderate
24%
Complexitylow
Why this could stall
  • Precise definition of ‘‘hostilities’’ in practice
  • Which specific forces, locations, or missions are covered
05 · Recent votes

Recent votes on the bill.

SENATE · Jan 14, 2026

Point of Order Well Taken (50-50, Vice President of the United States, voted Yea)

50 yes · 50 no

On the Point of Order S.J.Res. 98

Yes 50% No 50%
Against party line
Showing a quick cross-section of legislators, with followed members first when available.
SENATE · Jan 8, 2026

Motion to Discharge Agreed to (52-47)

52 yes · 47 no

On the Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 98

Yes 53% No 47%
Against party line
Showing a quick cross-section of legislators, with followed members first when available.
06 · Go deeper

Go deeper than the headline read.

Included on this page

Progressives emphasize restoring Congressional authority and avoiding unauthorized wars.

Short, targeted directive faces strong institutional resistance and Senate procedural barriers despite modest fiscal impact.

Unlocked analysis

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a concise substantive directive that clearly states the constitutional and statutory basis for requiring termination of U.S. military involvement in Venezuela abse…

Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.

Perspective breakdownsPassage barriersLegislative design reviewStakeholder impact map
Open full analysis