Access to this page has been denied
thehill.com
px-captcha

The top Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee took the rare step Wednesday of publicly announcing a hold on the Trump administration’s $2.8 billion plan to sell 40,000 one-ton bombs to Israel.

  • Arcanepotato@crazypeople.onlineEnglish
    11·
    2 days ago

    The wording is a little confusing the article:

    “I therefore will not clear this sale at this time. The decision does not diminish Congressional support for Israel’s legitimate defense needs; it reflects Congress’s responsibility to ensure that U.S.-funded weapons are used lawfully, responsibly, and with meaningful safeguards for human life.”

    …

    The top lawmakers on the House and Senate foreign affairs panels are generally informed by the State Department about a foreign arms sale over a certain dollar amount, and are given the opportunity to exercise an informal “hold” for more information on the arms sale before it goes forward.

    The State Department typically respects this hold and works with the member to resolve their concerns. But the Trump administration has previously ignored an objection from Meeks, moving forward on an arms sale package in February 2025 despite the Democrats “hold” on parts of the sale.

    It doesn’t sound like the panel gets a binding say in this. If someone would explain, I would be grateful.

    • Florencia (she/her)@lemmy.blahaj.zoneOP
      14·
      2 days ago

      It’s a temporary hold where Congress gets to ask for more info. You’re right that it’s informal and Trump doesn’t need their approval anyways.

      Perhaps it’s enough to make him back off before the midterms.

      • Arcanepotato@crazypeople.onlineEnglish
        1·
        2 days ago

        Thanks, I think him saying “will not clear…” threw me off. But to someone who knows about the process that could easily just mean “I’m not going to let it go without asking for more info”, not “I’m putting a stop to this” as I had read it.

    • danc4498@lemmy.worldEnglish
      4·
      2 days ago

      Sounds like there’s a formality amongst respectful parties. The state department is no longer respectful, so they’ll probably ignore this and do what they want.

    • Rhaedas@fedia.io
      1·
      2 days ago

      ensure that U.S.-funded weapons are used lawfully, responsibly, and with meaningful safeguards for human life.

      The lawfully makes sense except for who they’re selling it too. The other two sound weird when talking about weapons of war, especially with who they’re selling it too.