III 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. CON. RES. 13 

Expressing the sense of Congress that the President should not initiate 

military action against Iran without first obtaining authorization from 

Congress. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

FEBRUARY 15, 2007 

Mr. SANDERS submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was 

referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations 

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 

Expressing the sense of Congress that the President should 

not initiate military action against Iran without first 

obtaining authorization from Congress. 

Whereas article I, section 8 of the United States Constitution 

grants Congress the power to ‘‘declare war’’, to ‘‘lay and 

collect taxes’’, to ‘‘provide for the common defence and 

general welfare of the United States’’, to ‘‘raise and support armies’’, to ‘‘provide and maintain a navy’’, to 

‘‘make rules for the government and regulation of the 

land and naval forces’’, to ‘‘provide for calling forth the 

militia to execute the laws of the Union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions’’, to ‘‘provide for organizing, 

arming, and disciplining, the militia’’, and to ‘‘make all 

laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying 

into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS

2 

•SCON 13 IS 

vested by this Constitution in the Government of the 

United States, or in any department or officer thereof’’; 

Whereas the Constitution also grants Congress exclusive 

power over the purse, stating, ‘‘No money shall be drawn 

from the Treasury, but in consequence of appropriations 

made by law . . . .’’; 

Whereas the sole war power granted to the executive branch 

through the President can be found in article II, section 

2, which states, ‘‘The President shall be the Commander 

in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and 

of the Militia of the several States, when called into the 

actual Service of the United States . . . .’’; 

Whereas President George W. Bush and his Administration 

have argued that this ‘‘Commander in Chief’’ clause 

grants the President wide latitude to engage United 

States military forces abroad without prior authorization 

from Congress; 

Whereas the President further argues that previous unilateral 

actions by Presidents of both political parties add credence to this interpretation of the Constitution; 

Whereas, in reality, nothing in the history of the ‘‘Commander in Chief’’ clause suggests that the authors of the 

provision intended it to grant the executive branch the 

authority to engage United States forces in military action without any prior authorization from Congress, except to allow the President to repel sudden attacks and 

immediate threats; 

Whereas in the Federalist Paper Number 69, while comparing the lesser war-making power of the President of 

the United States with the war-making power of the King 

of Great Britain, Alexander Hamilton wrote, ‘‘The Presimstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS

3 

•SCON 13 IS 

dent is to be commander in chief of the army and navy 

of the United States. In this respect his authority would 

be nominally the same with that of the king of Great 

Britain, but in substance much inferior to it. It would 

amount to nothing more than the supreme command and 

direction of the military and naval forces, as first general 

and admiral of the confederacy; while that of the British 

king extends to the declaring of war, and to the raising 

and regulating of fleets and armies; all which, by the constitution under consideration, would appertain to the legislature.’’; 

Whereas James Madison declared that it is necessary to adhere to the ‘‘fundamental doctrine of the Constitution 

that the power to declare war is fully and exclusively 

vested in the legislature’’; 

Whereas, in 1793, President George Washington, when considering how to protect inhabitants of the frontier of the 

United States, instructed his Administration that ‘‘no offensive expedition of importance can be undertaken until 

after [Congress] have deliberated upon the subject, and 

authorized such a measure’’; 

Whereas, in 1801, when Thomas Jefferson sent a small 

squadron of frigates to the Mediterranean to protect 

against possible attacks by the Barbary powers, he told 

Congress that he was ‘‘unauthorized by the Constitution, 

without the sanction of Congress, to go beyond the line 

of defense’’, and further noted that it was up to Congress 

to authorize ‘‘measures of offense also’’; 

Whereas, according to the most definitive United States intelligence report, Iran is several years away from developing 

a nuclear weapon, and even the most pessimistic analysis 

by outside experts predicts that Iran is at least 3 years 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS

4 

•SCON 13 IS 

away from developing a nuclear weapon, assuming Iran 

suffers no setbacks during development, which would be 

unprecedented; 

Whereas diplomatic efforts involving Iran, the United States, 

the European Union, Russia, the People’s Republic of 

China, the International Atomic Energy Agency, and the 

United Nations Security Council continue; and 

Whereas, despite these diplomatic efforts and statements by 

President Bush and other members of his Administration 

that diplomacy is the preferred route, there are an increasing number of reports that preparations for war are 

underway: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives 

2 concurring), That Congress— 

3 (1) strongly affirms that initiating military ac4 tion against Iran without congressional approval 

5 does not fall within the President’s ‘‘Commander in 

6 Chief’’ powers under the Constitution; 

7 (2) rejects any suggestion that the Authoriza8 tion for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107–40; 

9 50 U.S.C. 1541 note), approved in response to the 

10 terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, explicitly or 

11 implicitly extends to authorizing military action 

12 against Iran, including over its nuclear program; 

13 (3) rejects any suggestion that the Authoriza14 tion for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolu15 tion of 2002 (Public Law 107–243; 50 U.S.C. 1541 

16 note) explicitly or implicitly extends to authorizing 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS

5 

•SCON 13 IS 

1 military action against Iran, including over its nu2 clear program; and 

3 (4) strongly and unequivocally affirms that 

4 seeking congressional authority prior to taking mili5 tary action against Iran is not discretionary, but is 

6 a legal and constitutional requirement. 

Æ 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS