Should the President be restricted from ordering unprovoked nuclear strikes without congressional approval?

Awaiting Vote
Bill Summary

This bill would forbid the President from ordering a nuclear strike that is first-use, or preceding any enemy nuclear strike on the United States or its allies, without Congress having declared war and explicitly authorized the strike beforehand. Sponsor: Rep. Ted Lieu [D-CA-33]
View full bill text ➔

How do you feel?

One click sends your opinion

Opponents say

•     Rebecca Hersman, director of the Project of Nuclear Issues at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, argues, “[Nuclear weapons] exist to protect us from catastrophe. Their role in the world is to prevent their use and to deter their use. You need the president to be able to react responsibly and quickly.”  
•     According to Gene Healey, vice president of libertarian think tank the Cato Institute,  “Simply passing a law won’t necessarily restrain presidential warmaking. Our experience with the War Powers Resolution makes that clear… Why would Lieu’s “no-first-use act” fare any differently?”  

Proponents say

•    Senator Edward Markey [D-MA], who introduced a companion bill to this legislation in the Senate, notes, “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.”  
•     According to William Perry, former Secretary of Defense under President Bill Clinton, “During my period as Secretary of Defense, I never confronted a situation, or could even imagine a situation, in which I would recommend that the President make a first strike with nuclear weapons… Certainly a decision that momentous for all of civilization should have the kind of checks and balances on Executive powers called for by our Constitution.”