últimas notícias

“Stand with your Commander in Chiefs!” the president added.

Republican lawmakers on Thursday adopted a similar argument, contending that both amendments would shackle Mr. Trump’s presidential prerogatives as commander in chief and endanger the nation’s security.

Representative Michael McCaul of Texas, the top Republican on the Foreign Affairs Committee, said he would “prefer a new and updated” authorization, but described repealing the current one without a replacement as irresponsible.

To do so, Mr. McCaul said, “endangers not only the United States’ national security but our coalition partners, most notably Iraq.”

Fewer Republicans voted for both measures on Thursday than when the House put up similar measures in a defense policy bill last year. Representative Chip Roy, Republican of Texas, who voted for a similar Iran amendment in July, for example, declined to support Mr. Khanna’s measure on Thursday.

“In the context of the current state of affairs, I don’t want to make a political statement that somehow we’re not united as a nation in our stand in holding the line against Iran,” Mr. Roy said in a brief interview.

But more libertarian-minded groups and lawmakers backed the measures. Both FreedomWorks, a conservative advocacy group, and Americans for Prosperity, the right-wing advocacy group founded by the Koch brothers, announced that votes against the amendment repealing the 2002 authorization would negatively impact the ratings they assign lawmakers.

“As commander in chief, the president can and should always project U.S. force to protect American lives and sovereignty,” Representative Andy Biggs, Republican of Arizona and the chairman of the House Freedom Caucus, wrote in an op-ed article before the vote.