General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forums***Tell your Congresspeople: Take the First Nuclear Strike Power out of the Madman's Hands***
This is a 2017 bill that says a President cannot order a preemptive nuclear strike without a declaration of war.
Right now, we have the DT administration threatening to do just that.
Nothing has ever been more urgent.
https://lieu.house.gov/sites/lieu.house.gov/files/documents/LIEU_002_xml%20%28115th%20Congress%29.pdf
A BILL
To prohibit the conduct of a first-use nuclear strike absent a declaration of war by Congress.
115TH CONGRESS 1ST SESSION
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa- tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the Restricting First Use of Nuclear Weapons Act of 2017.
bdamomma
(63,923 posts)it was introduced by Congressman Lieu (California) and Markey
https://lieu.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/congressman-lieu-senator-markey-introduce-restricting-first-use-0
Here is a snip
CONGRESSMAN LIEU, SENATOR MARKEY INTRODUCE THE RESTRICTING FIRST USE OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS ACT OF 2017
January 24, 2017 Press Release
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Washington Today, Congressman Ted W. Lieu (D | Los Angeles County) and Senator Edward J. Markey (D-Massachusetts) introduced H.R. 669 and S. 200, the Restricting First Use of Nuclear Weapons Act of 2017. This legislation would prohibit the President from launching a nuclear first strike without a declaration of war by Congress. The crucial issue of nuclear first use is more urgent than ever now that President Donald Trump has the power to launch a nuclear war at a moments notice.
Upon introduction of this legislation, Mr. Lieu issued the following statement:
It is a frightening reality that the U.S. now has a Commander-in-Chief who has demonstrated ignorance of the nuclear triad, stated his desire to be unpredictable with nuclear weapons, and as President-elect was making sweeping statements about U.S. nuclear policy over Twitter. Congress must act to preserve global stability by restricting the circumstances under which the U.S. would be the first nation to use a nuclear weapon. Our Founders created a system of checks and balances, and it is essential for that standard to be applied to the potentially civilization-ending threat of nuclear war. I am proud to introduce the Restricting First Use of Nuclear Weapons Act of 2017 with Sen. Markey to realign our nations nuclear weapons launch policy with the Constitution and work towards a safer world.
Upon introduction of this legislation, Senator Markey issued the following statement:
Nuclear war poses the gravest risk to human survival. Yet, President Trump has suggested that he would consider launching nuclear attacks against terrorists. Unfortunately, by maintaining the option of using nuclear weapons first in a conflict, U.S. policy provides him with that power. In a crisis with another nuclear-armed country, this policy drastically increases the risk of unintended nuclear escalation. Neither President Trump, nor any other president, should be allowed to use nuclear weapons except in response to a nuclear attack. By restricting the first use of nuclear weapons, this legislation enshrines that simple principle into law. I thank Rep. Lieu for his partnership on this common-sense bill during this critical time in our nations history.
Sponsor: Rep. Lieu, Ted [D-CA-33] (Introduced 01/24/2017)
Committees: House - Foreign Affairs
Latest Action: 01/24/2017 Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs. (All Actions)
https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/669?q=%7B%22search%22%3A%5B%22hr+669%22%5D%7D&r=1
for visibility
Tiggeroshii
(11,088 posts)OldHippieChick
(2,434 posts)trying to do something. Despite the fact that both my Senator's are R's, my Rep is a Dem, so I've written her. Thanks for telling us about Rep Lieu's bill.
pnwmom
(108,996 posts)to change their minds.
OldHippieChick
(2,434 posts)to the House first as it comes from Rep Lieu. If it were actually to pass there, I would then lobby my Senators very hard.
QED
(2,749 posts)Lurks Often
(5,455 posts)much less pass a House vote or Senate vote and certainly not with a veto proof margin. Even if ALL three things happen, about as likely as winning the lotto, it would probably not survive a court case. The powers of any president are clearly defined by law and historical precedent.