# H.Con.Res. 93 (119th): This concurrent resolution directs the President to remove U.S

This concurrent resolution directs the President to remove U.S. Armed Forces from hostilities against Iran unless explicitly authorized by a declaration of war or a congressional authorization for use of military force against Iran. Elements of the U.S. Armed Forces needed to defend the United States, an ally, or a partner from imminent attack are not covered by this requirement provided the President complies with a specified provision of the War Powers Resolution. (The provision generally requires the President to remove U.S. Armed Forces from hostilities no more than 60 days after the President notifies or is required to notify Congress of such involvement, unless Congress authorizes such use. For more information on the War Powers Resolution, see CRS In Focus 13134 .)

## How this bill is scored

Tier: no Tier 1 record. A bill with no record cannot newly become Tier 1.
Lane: de_escalation. Category: war_peace. Lane tag: prudential.
Lane: war_powers. Category: not stored. Lane tag: not stored.
Tier 1 sign-off: no record. A bill with no record cannot newly become Tier 1.
Stored polarity: good. A yea supports the bill. A nay is the penalized direction when the tag is scored as a protection. A yea on a credit tag is a credit.
Roll 307: On Agreeing to the Resolution. Vote type: final_passage.
Polarity rationale: Reviewed enrichment (llm_import) polarity: The resolution directly restrains unauthorized military hostilities against Iran by requiring withdrawal absent a declaration of war or specific authorization, which restrains unjust force and reinforces constitutional limits on war. The imminent-attack exception and the prudential questions of wartime command keep this from being an absolute verdict, but its primary operative effect is restraint of unauthorized war.
Theological note: The measure bears on the Christian concern that civil authority must not wage war without lawful warrant, and that the sword is entrusted to government for justice and defense, not for unjust aggression. It also raises the question of bloodguilt, since unauthorized hostilities risk unjust killing. The imminent-defense exception and the question of executive wartime decision-making are prudential matters that Scripture does not settle at this level of detail.

## Recorded votes

Roll 307: On Agreeing to the Resolution. Yea 220 · Nay 204 · Other 9.

HTML: https://justmeasure.org/bill/hconres-93-119/