![\"\"](\"http:\/\/www.globalresearch.ca\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/06\/Rep.-Keith-Ellison-400x208.jpg\")
<\/div>\nFeatured image:\u00a0Rep. Keith Ellison<\/em><\/p>\n In a little noticed but potentially monumental development, the House of Representatives voted unanimously for\u00a0an amendment<\/a>\u00a0to the National Defense Authorization Act of 2019 (H.R. 5515) that says no statute authorizes the use of military force against Iran.<\/em><\/p>\n The amendment, introduced by\u00a0Rep. Keith Ellison<\/strong>\u00a0(D-Minnesota), states,<\/p>\n \u201cIt is the sense of Congress that the use of the Armed Forces against Iran is not authorized by this Act or any other Act.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n A bipartisan majority of the House adopted the National Defense Authorization Act on May 24, with a vote of 351-66. The bill now moves to the Senate.<\/p>\n If the Senate version ultimately includes the Ellison amendment as well, Congress would send a clear message to\u00a0Donald Trump<\/strong>\u00a0that he has no statutory authority to militarily attack Iran.<\/p>\n This becomes particularly significant in light of Trump\u2019s May 8 withdrawal from the Iran nuclear deal. That withdrawal was followed by a\u00a0long list of demands<\/a>\u00a0by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, which could set the stage for a US attack on Iran.<\/p>\n Co-sponsors of the Ellison amendment include\u00a0Reps. Barbara Lee<\/strong>\u00a0(D-California),\u00a0Ro Khanna<\/strong>\u00a0(D-California),\u00a0Jan Schakowsky<\/strong>\u00a0(D-Illinois),\u00a0Jim McGovern<\/strong>\u00a0(D-Massachusetts) and\u00a0Walter Jones<\/strong>\u00a0(R-North Carolina).<\/p>\n \u201cThe unanimous passage of this bipartisan amendment is a strong and timely counter to the Trump administration\u2019s withdrawal from the Iran deal and its increasingly hostile rhetoric,\u201d Ellison said in a\u00a0press release<\/a>. \u201cThis amendment sends a powerful message that the American people and Members of Congress do not want a war with Iran. Today, Congress acted to reclaim its authority over the use of military force.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Likewise, Khanna stated,<\/p>\n \u201cThe War Powers Act and Constitution is clear that our country\u2019s military action must first always be authorized by Congress. A war with Iran would be unconstitutional and costly.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n McGovern concurred, stating,<\/p>\n \u201cCongress is sending a clear message that President Trump does not have the authority to go to war with Iran. With President Trump\u2019s reckless violation of the Iran Deal and failure to get Congressional approval for military strikes on Syria, there\u2019s never been a more important time for Congress to reassert its authority. It\u2019s long past time to end the White House\u2019s blank check and the passage of this amendment is a strong start.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Moreover, the Constitution only grants Congress the\u00a0power to declare war<\/a>. And the War Powers Resolution allows the president to introduce US Armed Forces into hostilities or imminent hostilities only after Congress has declared war, or in \u201ca national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces,\u201d or when there is \u201cspecific statutory authorization.\u201d<\/p>\n But even if the Ellison amendment survives the Senate and becomes part of the National Defense Authorization Act, Trump would likely violate it. He could target Iranian individuals as \u201csuspected terrorists\u201d on his global battlefield and\/or attack them in Iran with military force under his new\u00a0targeted killing rules<\/a>.<\/p>\n Unilateral Sanctions Against Iran Are Illegal<\/strong><\/p>\n Although the Ellison amendment states that no statute authorizes the use of US armed forces in Iran, it does not prohibit the expenditure of money to attack Iran. Nor does it proscribe the use of sanctions against Iran.<\/p>\n In fact, other amendments the House adopted mandate the imposition of sanctions against Iran.<\/p>\n An amendment introduced by\u00a0Rep. Peter Roskam<\/strong>\u00a0(R-Illinois) reflects the sense of Congress that<\/p>\n \u201cthe ballistic missile program of Iran represents a serious threat to allies of the United States in the Middle East and Europe, members of the Armed Forces deployed in those regions, and ultimately the United States.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n The Roskam amendment then states the US government \u201cshould impose tough primary and secondary sanctions against any sector of the economy of Iran or any Iranian person that directly or indirectly supports the ballistic missile program of Iran as well as any foreign person or financial institution that engages in transactions or trade that support that program.\u201d<\/p>\n And the House mandated the imposition of sanctions against people connected to named groups in Iran that \u201ccommit, threaten to commit, or support terrorism,\u201d in an amendment introduced by\u00a0Rep. Ted Poe<\/strong>\u00a0(R-Texas).<\/p>\n When Trump\u00a0announced his withdrawal<\/a>\u00a0from the Iran nuclear deal, he also reinstated US nuclear sanctions and \u201cthe highest level\u201d of economic restrictions on Iran. Those sanctions could\u00a0remove over one million barrels of Iran\u2019s oil<\/a>\u00a0from the global market.<\/p>\n The unilateral imposition of sanctions by the United States, without United Nations Security Council approval, violates the UN Charter. Article 41 empowers the Council, and only the Council, to impose and approve the use of sanctions.<\/p>\n The other parties to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, the formal name for the Iran deal, oppose ending it. Known as P5+1, they include the permanent members of the Security Council \u2014 the US, the United Kingdom, Russia, France and China \u2014 plus Germany, as well as the European Union.<\/p>\n At a minimum, France, Italy, Germany and the United Kingdom are\u00a0not likely to cooperate<\/a>\u00a0with the US\u2019s re-imposition of sanctions.<\/p>\n Trump Administration Gunning for War on Iran and Regime Change<\/strong><\/p>\n Before Trump\u00a0withdrew<\/a>\u00a0from the Iran nuclear agreement, Iran was\u00a0complying with its obligations<\/a>\u00a0under the pact.<\/p>\n Once Trump named\u00a0John Bolton,<\/strong>\u00a0notorious for advocating regime change<\/a>in Iran, as national security adviser, it was a foregone conclusion the United States would pull out of the pact.<\/p>\n Pompeo also supported renunciation of the deal. His over-the-top demands on Iran include the cessation of all enrichment of uranium, even for peaceful purposes (which is permitted by the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty).<\/p>\n \u201cTaken together, the demands would constitute a wholesale transformation by Iran\u2019s government, and they hardened the perception that what Trump\u2019s administration really seeks is a change in the Iranian regime,\u201d\u00a0the Associated Press reported<\/a>.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Jake Sullivan<\/strong>, who served in the Obama administration and was Hillary Clinton\u2019s lead foreign policy advisor during the presidential campaign,\u00a0said<\/a>\u00a0of the Pompeo demands,<\/p>\n \u201cThey set the bar at a place they know the Iranians can never accept.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Ellie Geranmayeh<\/strong>, a fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations, called the demands \u201cconditions of surrender<\/a>.\u201d<\/p>\n Meanwhile, it is unclear how long it will take to reconcile the House and Senate versions of the National Defense Authorization Act. Constituents who become aware of the risk of a US attack on Iran will invariably lobby their senators to include an admonition comparable to the House\u2019s Ellison amendment.<\/p>\n *<\/p>\n Copyright\u00a0Truthout<\/a>. Reprinted with\u00a0permission<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n Marjorie Cohn<\/strong>\u00a0is professor emerita at Thomas Jefferson School of Law, former president of the National Lawyers Guild, deputy secretary general of the International Association of Democratic Lawyers and an advisory board member of Veterans for Peace. An updated edition of her book,\u00a0Drones and Targeted Killing: Legal, Moral, and Geopolitical Issues<\/a>, was recently published. Visit her website:\u00a0http:\/\/marjoriecohn.com<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n