Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relating to the duration of authorizations of the use of force.
Summary
H.J. Res. 159 proposes a constitutional amendment that would limit the duration of future congressional authorizations for the use of military force outside the United States. Under the proposed amendment, any Act of Congress enacted after ratification that authorizes the use of military force abroad, and is not backed by a formal declaration of war, would automatically expire after five years unless the Act itself provides an earlier termination date.
The resolution is aimed at ensuring that authorizations for military action do not remain in effect indefinitely. It would apply only to future authorizations enacted after ratification, and it would not itself authorize any military force. Instead, it would change the constitutional framework governing how long such authorizations can remain valid unless Congress affirmatively renews or otherwise extends them.
Impact
If ratified by three-fourths of the states, the amendment would constrain future congressional war powers legislation by imposing a default five-year sunset on authorizations for the use of military force outside the United States, absent a declaration of war or an earlier expiration date written into the statute. This would affect Congress’s ability to maintain open-ended military authorizations and would likely require periodic reconsideration of existing and future AUMFs. It would not directly alter current law unless and until ratified, but it would create a new constitutional rule governing future statutes and the legal status of military force authorizations.
Sentiment
There is no recorded committee debate or vote history in the provided materials, so no formal legislative sentiment can be measured from hearings or roll calls. Based on the bill’s sponsorship and subject matter, the resolution appears to reflect a reform-minded, bipartisan interest in limiting indefinite military authorizations and increasing congressional oversight of the use of force. The text suggests a policy preference for periodic review rather than permanent or open-ended war powers.
Contention
The main point of contention is likely to be the balance between congressional oversight and executive flexibility in national security matters. Supporters would favor the five-year sunset as a check on prolonged military engagements and a way to force Congress to revisit authorizations. Opponents may argue that automatic expiration could create operational uncertainty, complicate long-term military planning, or weaken the United States’ ability to respond to evolving threats abroad. Because the resolution is a constitutional amendment, another likely concern is the high threshold for ratification and the permanence of the proposed change.