Is the U.S. Senate Saying I'm Sorry to Iraq by Repealing the 2002 Iraq War Resolution?

The U.S. Senate has just agreed, by a unanimous voice vote, to remove (repeal) a law from 2002 that gave the President broad power to wage war in Iraq. This 2002 law was originally used to justify invading Iraq in 2003. (AP News)

Earlier, the U.S. House of Representatives had also voted to repeal the same law. (AP News) The Senate's move is part of a defense bill — a law that decides funding and rules for the military. (Politico)

Supporters of the repeal say this is important because the 2002 law has sometimes been used by presidents to authorize military action without sufficient oversight by Congress. (FCNL) They also argue that Iraq today is no longer an enemy but a strategic partner, so the old war authorization no longer fits the relationship. (AP News)

However, it’s not certain whether the repeal will become final, because the bill with the change still needs to pass both the House and Senate in matched versions, and then be signed by the President.

The 2002 law wasn’t the only war authorization under review — the bill also aims to remove a 1991 law that backed the Gulf War. (Politico)

Even though the 2002 law has mostly been dormant, it has sometimes been stretched by presidents to justify actions beyond Iraq — for example, U.S. officials once claimed it justified the 2020 strike that killed Iranian General Qassem Soleimani. (FCNL)

Repealing that law doesn’t affect another war authorization from 2001 (passed after 9/11), which still remains in force and is used to justify some counterterrorism operations. (The Heritage Foundation)

What this means for Iraq:

1. A change in symbolism, more than an immediate change
   Repealing the 2002 war law is mostly symbolic for Iraq. It shows the U.S. acknowledges that the old logic for invading Iraq is outdated. It signals a shift in how the U.S. views its relationship with Iraq — from forced war to cooperation.

2. More balanced U.S.–Iraq relations
   With the old war authorization removed, Iraq may feel less overshadowed by U.S. military prerogatives. It strengthens the idea that Iraq is a sovereign partner, not a country dominated by U.S. war policies.

3. Fewer justifications for unilateral strikes
   Since the 2002 law was sometimes used to justify military actions in the region, removing it weakens arguments for future unilateral U.S. strikes inside or near Iraq (unless new authorization is sought). That can give more space for Iraq’s government to assert control over foreign military acts within its borders.

What this means for the United States:

1. Congress reclaims power over war decisions
   One big effect is that Congress is restoring its role in deciding when the U.S. goes to war. The Constitution gives Congress that power. Repealing old war authorizations prevents presidents from using them as blanket permission to act militarily without asking Congress. (FCNL)

2. More checks and balances
   Without the 2002 law, a future president who wants to launch significant military operations (especially in or around Iraq) will more likely need to get explicit approval from Congress. That makes military decision-making more democratic and accountable.

3. Limits to “overreach” of executive power
   Past presidents sometimes interpreted the 2002 law broadly to justify actions far beyond what many people thought it should allow. Repealing it reduces the possibility of such overreach. (Default)

4. Still, tools remain (2001 AUMF)
   The U.S. still has a separate 2001 war authorization (passed after the September 11 attacks) that gives the president authority to act against terrorist groups. Repealing the 2002 law does not affect the 2001 power. (The Heritage Foundation)

5. Political and legal debate ahead
   Even though both chambers of Congress have already approved versions of the repeal, the president may still resist or veto it. Also, new laws may need to define when and how military force can be used — those debates will become more critical.

In short, the Senate’s move to repeal the 2002 Iraq war authorization is a way of closing a chapter on the U.S. invasion of Iraq and shifting power back toward Congress in decisions about war. For Iraq, it represents a more equal relationship. For the U.S., it strengthens constitutional limits on when presidents can use the military.

If you like, I can also explain some possible risks or challenges from this change. Do you want me to go into that?

• AP News
• Politico
• AP News