Common Cause strongly condemns President Trump’s unilateral use of U.S. military and law enforcement forces in Venezuela, including the detention of that country’s president and associated military operations. These actions were taken without congressional authorization and represent a dangerous expansion of executive power that puts American lives, long-term national interests, and constitutional safeguards at risk.

The Constitution assigns decisions that amount to war to Congress, not to the President acting alone. President Trump did not seek or receive congressional authorization before deploying military force and conducting operations within a sovereign nation. No matter how illegitimate or abusive a foreign leader may be, the Constitution does not permit a president to initiate armed conflict, seize foreign leaders, or escalate hostilities without the consent of the American people through their elected representatives.

The administration has sought to frame its actions as law enforcement operations tied to criminal charges and the protection of U.S. personnel. That framing does not alter the constitutional analysis. The U.S. military is not a global police force, and criminal allegations do not confer authority to carry out military operations or arrests inside another country absent congressional approval or international legal process. Using military force to execute or protect such actions risks transforming ordinary criminal claims into acts of war by presidential fiat.

This episode also reflects a broader strategy in which foreign military action is tied to domestic political objectives and corporate interests. The Trump administration’s campaign against Venezuela has been closely linked to control over the country’s oil exports and to negotiations involving American oil companies’ unique U.S. license to operate there. Military action, tanker seizures, and attacks on maritime traffic appear designed to shift leverage over who profits from Venezuelan oil and how it moves in global markets. Decisions about war and peace cannot be used as tools to advantage specific corporate actors or to dictate control over foreign resources.

At the same time, the Trump administration has treated the confrontation with Venezuela as a pathway to advancing a broader immigration crackdown. Earlier efforts to invoke the Alien Enemies Act to deport Venezuelan nationals were blocked by courts because the United States was not at war with Venezuela. Escalating military action and labeling the conflict as a “war” may be a pretextual attempt to revive those efforts, opening the door to mass deportations and expanded executive authority at home under the guise of wartime powers. Foreign military action should not be used to manufacture legal or political justification for sweeping domestic immigration enforcement measures.

These actions set a dangerous precedent. If the United States asserts the right to use military force to capture foreign leaders, seize resources, or start wars without congressional authorization, it invites other nations to claim the same authority. That weakens the international norms that help prevent global conflict and increases the risk to American lives and interests at home and abroad, including service members, diplomats, and civilians.

History shows the costs of bypassing Congress when using military force. Congressional authorization is not a procedural obstacle. It is the constitutional safeguard designed to force public accountability, careful deliberation, and clarity about objectives and consequences. When presidents act alone, the country bears the risks while accountability disappears.

Common Cause calls on Congress to immediately demand a full briefing, reassert its constitutional authority, and exercise meaningful oversight of these actions. The power to commit the nation to armed conflict does not belong to any single president. Protecting American interests, American lives, and the constitutional system requires enforcing that limit, especially when it is politically inconvenient.