在两党的强烈支持下，参议院在一次测试投票中以67票对27票废除了授权。
现在几乎可以肯定参议院将在下周的最终投票中通过该法案，但尚不清楚共和党控制的众议院将如何处理该法案。
注意到美国和伊拉克现在是该地区的安全伙伴，主要共同提案人弗吉尼亚州民主党参议员蒂姆·凯恩周三表示，国会早就应该重申其宣战的宪法权力，他说，“20年后，是时候废除这一权力，并再次表明国会可以行使第一条肌肉，”指的是宪法规定的宣战权力。
凯恩的儿子是一名海军陆战队步兵军官，他回忆说，2002年中期选举前，当他还是副州长时，他对伊拉克战争的仓促感到愤怒，后来他努力争取参议院军事委员会和外交关系委员会废除两项伊拉克“AUMFs或使用武力的授权。
2023年3月15日，蒂姆·凯恩参议员与参议院民主党领导人一起在华盛顿国会大厦向记者发表讲话，讨论结束2001年9月11日恐怖袭击后颁布的2001年使用武力的授权。
J.斯科特·阿普尔怀特/美联社
“美国人厌倦了无休止的战争，”参议院多数党领袖查克·舒默周三在辩论前说。
差不多在同一个星期四，他说:“自2002年以来，伊拉克发生了巨大的变化，现在是法律跟上变化的时候了。伊拉克战争本身早已结束。这个AUMF已经过时了，我们再也没有理由让它继续存在下去了。”
在参议院即将投票前不久，白宫权衡了乔·拜登总统的支持。
它在一份声明中说:“拜登总统仍然致力于与国会合作，确保使用军事力量的过时授权被一个更适合保护美国人免受现代恐怖主义威胁的狭窄而具体的框架所取代。”
参议院外交关系委员会上周以13票对8票废除了1991年和2002年对使用武力(AUMF)的授权。
舒默已经证实，在最终通过之前，下周将对修正案进行投票。凯恩说，他认为这可能会包括两个共和党修正案被委员会拒绝。
一个是由得克萨斯州共和党参议员特德·克鲁兹提出的，是共和党反对废除的核心。一些共和党人认为，废除这些法律可能会在世界上一个不断动荡的地区发出危险的信号，尤其是在伊朗问题上。该委员会的最高共和党人——爱达荷州的吉姆·里施——一再坚持认为，废除这些措施将向伊朗发出一个信息，即美国缺乏决心。
克鲁兹修正案将确认美国有权攻击伊朗，尽管该委员会上周以13票对8票否决了该措施。
共和党参议员托德·杨(Todd Young)是凯恩废除该法案的主要发起人，也是一名海军和海军陆战队老兵，他认为，虽然他也和他的同事一样对伊朗感到担忧，但未来的政府应该到国会寻求对军事行动的具体批准。
“我认为，来自伊朗的威胁是如此重大，与911以来的战争或萨达姆·侯赛因的伊拉克战争如此不同，如果形势需要，我们必须通过一个新的AUMF，”杨在该法案首次提交时争辩道。“那些主张保留2002年AUMF作为威慑伊朗的手段的人，尽管这绝不是这项授权的意图，但他们将建立在过去的滥用之上，并主张扩大战争权力，最终使国会和本委员会变得无关紧要。”
该小组的主席、来自新泽西的民主党参议员鲍勃·梅嫩德斯周三表示，任何未来的政府仍然有权通过国会批准用于阿富汗战争的仍然有效的2001年AUMF，追捕伊斯兰国和其他伊朗支持的团体，追捕基地组织——9·11恐怖袭击的实施者，以及追捕塔利班、伊斯兰国和附属的恐怖组织。
“这对抵御任何伊朗威胁都没有影响。梅嫩德斯周三表示:“根据2001年AUMF法案和宪法，总统已经有权对威胁美国人员的ISIS或伊朗支持的团体采取军事行动。”。
共和党发起的第二项修正案本应废除2001年的使用武力授权，但遭到了委员会所有成员的全面拒绝，只有提案人肯塔基州参议员兰德·保罗除外。
拜登政府早在2021年众议院首次投票废除2002年的授权时就表示支持这项努力。
“政府支持废除2002年的AUMF，因为美国没有正在进行的军事活动完全依赖2002年的AUMF作为国内法律基础，废除2002年的AUMF可能对当前的军事行动产生最小的影响，”政府在一份政府政策声明中说。
然而，废除努力在现在共和党控制的众议院的命运尚不明朗，尽管其赞助者跨越了政治光谱，从德克萨斯州的极右分子奇普·罗伊到弗吉尼亚州的温和派民主党众议员阿比盖尔·斯潘伯格。
一位参议员，她自己也是伊拉克战争的老兵，在周三热情地支持废除该法案。
“这些文件为军事行动设定了法律框架，这些法律框架应该为正在下降的美国人确定任务，但最近，华盛顿这些权力大厅中有太多的人摆脱了这一责任，躲在这份令人发指的过时文件的背后。他们害怕让这些战争重新成为焦点所带来的政治风险。他们一直盯着选举日，”双腿截肢参议员谭美·达克沃斯说。
“国会把责任推卸给了我们的军队。在这些AUMF法案通过后的20多年里，当权者已经延伸和扭曲了他们的初衷。他们让我们的部队没有一个明确的任务，”她说。
Decades later, Senate on track to repeal authorizations for Iraq wars
The Senate on Thursday, in a procedural move, cleared the way for a final vote on repealing decades-old war powers measures that authorized two wars with Iraq -- first under former President George H. W. Bush in the Gulf War, and then by his son, former President George W. Bush -- with supporters fearing that the outdated authorizations could be misused by a future president.
In a strong bipartisan showing, the Senate voted 67-27 in a test vote to repeal the authorizations.
It's now all but certain to pass the Senate in a final vote next week, but it's less clear is how a Republican-controlled House will handle the legislation.
Noting that the U.S. and Iraq are now security partners in the region, lead co-sponsor Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia argued on Wednesday that it is long past time for Congress to reassert its constitutional authority to declare war, saying, "After 20 years, it's time to repeal this and show again that Congress can exercise that Article I muscle," referencing the war declaration powers spelled out in the Constitution.
Kaine, whose son is a Marine infantry officer, recalled being angered by what he called a rush to war in Iraq ahead of the 2002 midterm elections, when he was a lieutenant governor, and then later fought to get on the Senate Armed Services Committee and Foreign Relations Committee to repeal the two Iraq "AUMFs" -- or authorizations for the use of military force.
"Americans are tired of endless wars," said Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-NY, Wednesday ahead of the debate.
He argued much the same Thursday, saying, "The nation of Iraq has changed dramatically since 2002, and it's time the laws on the books catch up with the changes. The Iraq war has itself been long over. This AUMF has outlived its purpose and we can no longer justify keeping it in effect."
Shortly before the Senate was set to vote, the White House weighed in with President Joe Biden's support.
"President Biden remains committed to working with the Congress to ensure that outdated authorizations for the use of military force are replaced with a narrow and specific framework more appropriate to protecting Americans from modern terrorist threats," it said in a statement.
The Senate Foreign Relations Committee last week voted 13-8 to repeal both the 1991 and 2002 Authorizations for the Use of Military Force (AUMF).
Schumer has confirmed that there will be votes on amendments next week before final passage. Kaine said he thought it likely that those would include the two GOP amendments rejected by the committee.
One -- by Republican Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas -- is at the core of GOP opposition to repeal. Some Republicans have argued that repealing the laws might risk sending a dangerous message in an ever volatile part of the world, particularly with regard to Iran. The top Republican on the committee -- Jim Risch of Idaho -- has repeatedly maintained that repealing the measures would send a message to Iran that the U.S. lacks resolve.
The Cruz amendment would affirm that the U.S. has the authority to attack Iran, though the committee last week rejected that measure 13-8.
GOP Sen. Todd Young, a lead sponsor of the repeal effort with Kaine and a Navy and Marine Corps veteran, argued that while he, too, shares his colleagues' concerns about Iran, a future administration should come to Congress and seek a specific approval for military action.
"I believe that the threat from Iran is so significant and so different from the wars since 9/11 or Saddam Hussain's Iraq, that we must pass a new AUMF should the situation require it," Young contended when the bill was first introduced. "Those advocating for leaving the 2002 AUMF in place as a means of deterring Iran, when that was in no way the intention of this authorization, would be building on past abuses and advocating for precisely the kind of expansion of war power authorities that ultimately makes Congress and this committee irrelevant."
And the chairman of the panel, Democratic Sen. Bob Menendez of New Jersey, contended Wednesday that any future administration still has authority to go after ISIS and other Iranian backed groups through the still-viable 2001 AUMF that Congress approved for the war in Afghanistan and to go after al-Qaeda - the perpetrators of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, as well as to pursue the Taliban, ISIS, and affiliated terror groups.
"This will have no impact on defending against any Iranian threat. The president already has the authority under the '01 AUMF and the constitution for military operations against ISIS or Iranian backed groups that threaten US personnel," Menendez said Wednesday.
The second GOP-sponsored amendment would have repealed that 2001 use-of-force authorization but was roundly rejected by all committee members but its sponsor, Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky.
The Biden administration said back in 2021 when the House first voted to repeal the 2002 authorization that it supported the effort.
"The administration supports the repeal of the 2002 AUMF, as 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," the administration said in a statement of administration policy.
The repeal effort's fate in the now GOP-controlled House, though, is unclear, despite its sponsors spanning the political spectrum from the far right via Chip Roy of Texas to moderate Democratic Rep. Abigail Spanberger of Virginia.
One senator, a veteran of the Iraq War herself, made a passionate case for repeal Wednesday.
"The documents set the legal framework for military action that are supposed to define the mission for the Americans who are going downrange, but lately, too many in these halls of power in Washington have shrugged off that duty, hiding behind this outrageously outdated document. They've been scared of the political risks that come with bringing these wars back into the spotlight. They've been staring down election days," said double amputee Sen. Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill.
"Congress has shirked responsibility to our troops. For more than 20 years since passing these AUMF's those in power have stretched and skewed their original intent. They've left our troops without a clearly defined mission," she said.
