WE OPPOSE WAR WITH CUBA:

CONGRESS AND THE DANGEROUS DECLINE OF WAR-MAKING ACCOUNTABILITY

We oppose war with Cuba and reject the growing normalization of military threats against a neighboring nation only ninety miles from U.S. shores.

On April 28, 2026, the Senate had an opportunity to advance S.J.Res.124, Senator Tim Kaine’s resolution requiring congressional approval before any unilateral U.S. military action against Cuba. Instead, Senate Republicans blocked it through a procedural point of order in a 51–47 vote, preventing full debate on legislation designed to reinforce Congress’s constitutional authority before military escalation could occur.

Under the Constitution, the power to declare war was deliberately placed in Congress—not the presidency—to prevent unilateral military action and ensure that decisions carrying enormous human and geopolitical consequences receive public debate and legislative approval. The War Powers Resolution of 1973 was intended to further restrain executive overreach, yet in recent decades, presidents of both parties have increasingly expanded military operations, interventions, and hostilities without clear congressional authorization. This growing pattern has steadily weakened one of the most important checks on executive power.

Introduced by Senators Tim Kaine, Adam Schiff, and Ruben Gallego, S.J.Res.124 sought to push back against that trend by affirming that military action against Cuba could not proceed solely at the discretion of the president. Its procedural defeat did not authorize war, but it did block a direct Senate confrontation over whether Congress is willing to actively defend its constitutional role as presidents continue testing its limits.

That matters because a military conflict with Cuba would be reckless and destabilizing. A confrontation in the Caribbean could trigger humanitarian emergencies, refugee crises, economic disruption, and broader instability throughout Latin America. After decades of sanctions, political hostility, and inconsistent diplomatic openings, escalating toward armed conflict would deepen suffering while increasing the risk of long-term regional fallout. History has repeatedly shown that executive-led military escalation, especially when congressional oversight is sidelined, can produce consequences far beyond its stated objectives.

The Senate’s decision to block debate on S.J.Res.124 should raise serious concerns not only about Cuba, but about the broader erosion of congressional war-making authority itself. If Congress continues surrendering its constitutional responsibility, presidents will face fewer barriers to military escalation without meaningful democratic consent.

At a time of rising global instability, the United States should be strengthening safeguards against unnecessary war—not weakening them. Peace, diplomacy, and a full restoration of congressional authority over military action remain essential if America is to avoid repeating the costly pattern of unchecked executive conflict.

S.J.Res.124 - A joint resolution to direct the removal of United States Armed Forces from hostilities within or against the Republic of Cuba that have not been authorized by Congress.

Vote: Question: On the Point of Order (Is the Point of Order Well Taken Re: The Privilege Status of S.J.Res. 124?)

Resolution PDF

Kaine, Schiff & Gallego Introduce War Powers Resolution for Cuba (Kaine, 3-13-26)

Senate Republicans reject attempt to end Trump's blockade of Cuba (PBS, 4-28-26)

Senate Republicans block measure to stop Trump from attacking Cuba (The Hill, 4-28-26)

Senate Democrats seek to prevent military action against Cuba (Roll Call, 3-16-26)

Democrats file war powers resolution to prevent Trump from attacking Cuba without approval (The Hill, 3-13-26)

Warning of Another ‘Disaster’ Like Iran, Senators Introduce War Powers Resolution on Cuba (Common Dreams, 3-13-26)