South Dakota House Bill HCR6006

South Dakota 2022 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/27/22
• Refer: 1/31/22
• Report Pass: 2/16/22
• Engrossed: 2/22/22

Caption

To urge the United States Congress and the President of the United States to take no action to employ military forces of the United States in active-duty combat unless the United States Congress has passed an official declaration of war and to bring troops home who are engaged in unconstitutional foreign conflicts.

Impact

If enacted, HCR6006 would reinforce the need for congressional approval before sending troops into combat, aiming to restore a system of checks and balances between the legislative and executive branches concerning military actions. By calling for a repeal of the broad and unspecific 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force, the resolution seeks to prevent excessive military engagements that lack clear objectives and conditions for withdrawal. This could significantly modify how military authorizations are processed, requiring a more stringent legislative review and debate for future military actions.

Summary

HCR6006 is a Concurrent Resolution introduced in the South Dakota Legislature, urging the United States Congress and the President not to engage military forces in active-duty combat without an official declaration of war from Congress. The resolution underscores the constitutional powers given to Congress for waging war, highlighting concerns over the Executive Branch's increasing authority in military engagements without proper legislative oversight. It draws upon historical figures like George Washington, James Madison, and Thomas Jefferson to reinforce the resolution's arguments that military action should adhere to constitutional guidelines.

Contention

During discussions surrounding HCR6006, there may have been contention regarding the implications it holds for U.S. military policy, particularly in light of ongoing foreign conflicts. Supporters of the resolution argue for the necessity of congressional oversight to limit the potential for endless military operations, reflecting a growing public sentiment favoring reduced military involvement abroad. Opponents, however, might express concerns about the practicality of requiring a declaration for every military action, particularly in urgent situations where rapid response is needed. Thus, the resolution stands at a crossroads of constitutional intent versus contemporary military realities.