News
Trump Relaxes Limits on Counterterrorism Strikes Outside Conventional War Zones
President Trump has rescinded Biden-era limits on counterterrorism drone strikes and commando raids outside conventional war zones, reverting to the looser set of rules he used in his first term, according to officials familiar with the matter.
Under restrictions imposed by the Biden administration, U.S. military and C.I.A. drone operators generally had to obtain permission from the White House to target a suspected militant outside a conventional war zone. Now commanders in the field will again have greater latitude to decide for themselves whether to carry out a strike.
The relaxation of the rules suggests that the United States is likely to more frequently carry out airstrikes aimed at killing terrorism suspects in poorly governed places that are not deemed traditional battlefield zones, like Somalia and Yemen. It also means there may be greater risk to civilians.
The Trump administration did not formally announce the change, elements of which were reported earlier by CBS News. The report also said Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth had signed a directive, apparently implementing the change for the U.S. military’s Africa Command, in a meeting last month at its headquarters in Germany. Mr. Hegseth linked to the CBS report in a social media post, stating only: “Correct.”
But another person familiar with the matter, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss the sensitive issue, clarified that Mr. Trump had reinstated the rules he had put in place in October 2017, specifically revoking a set of rules Mr. Biden had signed in October 2022. A senior Pentagon official confirmed that account.
It is not clear when Mr. Trump made the change, but it appears to have been after an airstrike targeting ISIS militants in Somalia on Feb. 1. In a speech to the Conservative Political Action Conference on Feb. 21, Sebastian Gorka, the National Security Council’s senior director for counterterrorism, dramatically described Mr. Trump personally approving that operation. That step would no longer have been necessary after the switch.
Mr. Hegseth was in Germany on Feb. 11. There was a strike targeting ISIS militants on Feb. 16, according to U.S. Africa Command. Mr. Gorka did not mention that one in his speech, but he declared: “We have unleashed the hammers of hell on ISIS.”
Redacted versions of both the first-term Trump rules and the Biden rules became public after The New York Times filed Freedom of Information Act lawsuits for them. (The American Civil Liberties Union also brought a separate, parallel lawsuit under the disclosure law for the Trump-era rules.)
Under the first-term Trump system, the government laid out a set of general operating principles in which counterterrorism “direct action” — usually meaning airstrikes, but sometimes commando raids — may take place. So long as those conditions were met, operators decided for themselves whether to target particular militants. By contrast, the Biden system required White House approval for each such strike.
Moreover, the Trump system permitted targeting militants based only on their status as members of a terrorist group — meaning commanders could, if they chose to do so for policy reasons, blast away at low-level foot soldiers. By requiring the president’s personal approval, the Biden system essentially limited strikes to particular high-value targets.
Both sets of rules said there should be “near certainty” that no civilian bystanders would be killed, while allowing exceptions. A Biden-era review found that while the Trump rules for specific countries had kept the “near certainty” standard when it came to protecting civilian women and children, they often allowed a lower degree of certainty for adult civilian men.
Brian Hughes, a National Security Council spokesman, responded to a request for comment about the changes with a broad statement about untying the hands of commanders.
“President Trump will not hesitate to eliminate any terrorist who is plotting to kill Americans,” he said. “We won’t tolerate Biden-era bureaucracy preventing our warfighters from doing their job. America is back in the business of counterterrorism and killing jihadists.”
The Biden rules already allowed commanders to carry out strikes in self-defense without any need for higher-level permission. Most counterterrorism airstrikes in recent years fit in that category, like firing at Al Shabab militants in Somalia to defend partner forces of the United States, and at Houthis in Yemen to protect ships they were menacing.
And there have been fewer counterterrorism raids and drone strikes outside recognized war zones as the global terrorist threat has evolved.
During the rise of ISIS, for example, extremists flocked to Iraq and Syria — where the United States has had ground forces engaged in combat and considered a conventional war zone, and so the special rules for so-called direct action operations did not apply.
The rise of armed drone technology early in the 21st century coincided with the sprawling war that began with the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, and targeted killings away from conventional war zones became a central feature of the armed conflict.
Terrorist groups tended to operate from poorly governed spaces or failed states where there were few or no American troops, and no police force that was able to arrest people and suppress the threat they posed. Such places included tribal regions of Pakistan, rural Yemen, Somalia and Libya.
Drone strikes targeting terrorism suspects in such places began under President George W. Bush and soared in frequency during the first term of President Barack Obama. So did legal and political concerns about civilian casualties. The government’s deliberate killing, in 2011, of an American citizen suspected of terrorism, Anwar al-Awlaki, without a trial, intensified the debate.
In May 2013, Mr. Obama imposed the first systematic set of rules to regulate when the military or the C.I.A. could carry out such operations away from so-called hot battlefields and to constrain excessive use. His system involved a high-level-interagency review of whether a suspect posed a threat to Americans.
Mr. Trump replaced those rules in 2017 with his decentralized framework. Mr. Biden suspended that system and imposed his own version, which in many respects resembled Mr. Obama’s — and has now itself been canceled.
News
How Each House Member Voted on the Iran War Powers Resolution
Vote
Total
Democrats
Republicans
215
211
4
208
0
208
The House on Wednesday passed a measure to direct President Trump withdraw U.S. forces from Iran or win congressional approval to continue military operations there. The vote was the fourth of its kind in the chamber since the war began, the previous three having failed.
A vote on this measure was originally scheduled for last month but was pulled by House Republican leaders after it became clear they lacked the votes at the time to defeat it because of several members’ absences. Several Republicans were also absent on Wednesday, but party leaders were unable to delay the vote any longer.
Votes fell mostly along party lines, with the exception of four Republicans, who voted with Democrats to pass the measure. Representative Jared Golden, Democrat of Maine, who had previously voted with Republicans, flipped and voted with his party.
Republicans who voted against their party
The House vote came after four Senate Republicans last month broke from their party to advance a measure to assert the legislature’s role in authorizing the war. The Senate had rejected seven other similar measures, but Republicans in both chambers have expressed increased uneasiness with the conflict as it wears on.
Even if a war powers resolution passed in both the House and Senate, it would be subject to an all-but-certain veto by Mr. Trump, which would need a two-thirds majority in both chambers to override. Beyond that, the president and his senior aides have frequently dismissed efforts by Congress to rein in his war powers, saying they are unconstitutional.
How Every Member Voted
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
No N
No N
No N No N
No N
Did not vote
Did not vote
Did not vote Did not vote
Did not vote
Did not vote
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y Yes Y
Yes Y
Yes Y
Did not vote
Republicans
Member
Answer
Democrats
Member
Answer
News
House votes to rein in Trump on Iran as war loses GOP support
Washington — The House on Wednesday passed a measure that would force President Trump to end the war with Iran without congressional authorization, marking the first time the lower chamber has defied the White House on the conflict.
The House voted 215 to 208 to approve the war powers resolution with the help of four Republicans. Democratic Rep. Jared Golden of Maine, who has voted against the three previous failed attempts, also dropped his opposition and voted for the measure, giving his party unanimity on the issue.
Republican Reps. Thomas Massie of Kentucky, Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania, Tom Barrett of Michigan and Warren Davidson of Ohio voted with Democrats in favor of the measure.
Democrats in the chamber erupted in applause after passage.
The vote was supposed to take place before lawmakers left for the Memorial Day recess, but House GOP leaders abruptly pulled the vote when it became clear they did not have the numbers to block it. Several Republicans were absent and others were expected to support it.
The Senate advanced a similar measure in May to rein in Mr. Trump on Iran after four Republicans joined all but one Democrat to push it forward. Three Republican absences also helped deliver the breakthrough after seven previous unsuccessful votes.
But the Senate’s procedural vote was just the first step on the way to potential passage, and Republicans will have another opportunity to block it in the coming days.
It’s unclear when they plan to vote on the House version. In a statement, House Democratic leaders called on Senate Republicans “to do the right thing.”
Support for the war from some Republicans waned after the conflict passed a statutory 60-day deadline under the War Powers Resolution of 1973, which says the president must remove armed forces from hostilities if Congress has not authorized the war. The war passed the deadline on May 1, but the administration has argued that a fragile ceasefire stopped the clock in early April, though both sides have carried out attacks since then.
The Trump administration has also argued the War Powers Resolution of 1973 is unconstitutional, though that theory has never been tested in court.
Republicans who have voted in favor of limiting Mr. Trump’s military powers in Iran have been uncomfortable with the lack of congressional authorization on the war and a strategy to end it. Some fear the war’s unpopularity and the economic fallout could harm the GOP’s chances at keeping control of Congress after the midterm elections in November.
GOP Rep. Ashley Hinson of Iowa, who is running for Senate, said in a private exchange at a campaign stop last week that the war could be a “political liability” if it continues beyond “the next couple of weeks,” according to audio obtained by CBS News.
But Mr. Trump said last month he was in “no hurry” to make a deal with Iran ahead of the midterms.
“Everybody’s saying, ‘Oh, the midterms, I’m in a hurry.’ I’m in no hurry,” he said.
The resolution approved Wednesday was introduced in April by Rep. Gregory Meeks of New York, the top Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee. It directs the president “to remove United States Armed Forces from hostilities with Iran,” unless Congress declares war or authorizes the use of military force.
Rep. Brian Mast of Florida, the Republican chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, earlier Wednesday called it a “stupid political vote” that “weakens the president’s hands as he’s negotiating with Iran.”
After the vote, Meeks brushed off the assertion that the war powers votes have undercut the president during negotiations with Iran. When asked whether Democrats would keep forcing votes to end the Iran war, Meeks told reporters, “You can expect us to continue to do our jobs.”
“We’re going to continue to do our constitutional responsibilities,” he said.
Fitzpatrick, who also voted in favor of a war powers resolution in May, said, “The law is the law.”
“We have to follow the law. There’s a law on the books,” Fitzpatrick said. “So you have two choices: You either follow the law or you change the law. You can’t violate the law. That’s not an option.”
During floor debate on the measure on May 20, Democrats questioned why Republicans haven’t held a vote on an authorization for military force to provide Mr. Trump with legal guardrails for attacking Iran.
“If my Republican colleagues believe this is justified, they should bring an AUMF to the floor,” Meeks said.
There’s been little momentum so far behind an AUMF introduced by Barrett earlier in May.
Rep. Kevin Kiley of California, an independent who caucuses with Republicans, argued there are “better tools” for Congress to assert its authority.
“We actually have the ability to provide direction as to how funds should be used,” Kiley said, referring to Congress’ power of the purse. “I understand why people want to use whatever tools are available, but I believe that Congress should use those tools of congressional oversight and the powers we have under Article I that really have teeth here.”
News
Map: 5.1-Magnitude Earthquake Strikes off the Coast of California
Note: Map shows the area with a shake intensity of 3 or greater, which U.S.G.S. defines as “weak,” though the earthquake may be felt outside the areas shown. The New York Times
A moderately strong, 5.1-magnitude earthquake struck in the North Pacific Ocean on Wednesday, according to the United States Geological Survey.
The temblor happened at 5:45 a.m. Pacific time about 40 miles west of Petrolia, Calif., data from the agency shows.
As seismologists review available data, they may revise the earthquake’s reported magnitude. Additional information collected about the earthquake may also prompt U.S.G.S. scientists to update the shake-severity map.
Subsequent quakes have been reported in the same area. Such temblors are typically aftershocks caused by minor adjustments along the portion of a fault that slipped at the time of the initial earthquake.
Aftershocks detected
Quakes and aftershocks within 100 miles
Aftershocks can occur days, weeks or even years after the first earthquake. These events can be of equal or larger magnitude to the initial earthquake, and they can continue to affect already damaged locations.
The New York Times
When quakes and aftershocks occurred
Sources: United States Geological Survey (epicenter, aftershocks, shake intensity); LandScan via Oak Ridge National Laboratory (population density) | Notes: Shaking categories are based on the Modified Mercalli Intensity scale. When aftershock data is available, the corresponding maps and charts include earthquakes within 100 miles and seven days of the initial quake. All times above are Pacific time. Shake data is as of Wednesday, June 3 at 6:03 a.m. Pacific time. Aftershocks data is as of Wednesday, June 3 at 8:01 a.m. Pacific time.
-
West Virginia2 minutes agoRoot’s walk-off hit sends Keyser past PikeView, 4-3 – WV MetroNews
-
Wyoming9 minutes ago
Take Back Wyoming fundraiser
-
Crypto12 minutes agoRobert Kiyosaki Asks How Government Taking 40% of Your Money Still Ends up Trillions in Debt
-
Finance17 minutes agoHouston budget amendment would give financial assistance to help those impacted by a trash fee
-
Fitness24 minutes agoHow Jeremy Clarkson Reset His Health and Fitness at 66 – Walking, Pilates and Trying ‘Not to Die’
-
Movie Reviews32 minutes ago
Movie Review: Paul Rudd and Nick Jonas hit the right notes in ‘Power Ballad’
-
World37 minutes ago
Trump Says Iran Has Agreed to Not Have a Nuclear Weapon
-
News47 minutes agoHow Each House Member Voted on the Iran War Powers Resolution