Venezuela Strike Sharpens War Powers Debate Among Virginia Lawmakers

As Virginia lawmakers prepare to return to Richmond next week for the start of the 2026 General Assembly, Democratic officials across the state and congressional delegation are mounting a unified pushback against the U.S. military strike on Venezuela and the arrest of President Nicolás Maduro, while Republicans have largely praised the operation as a long-overdue show of force.

Del. Dan Helmer, D-Fairfax, plans to file legislation ahead of the session to restrict the federal government from deploying the Virginia National Guard to overseas conflicts such as Venezuela or using Guard troops in American cities without clear legal authorization.

“I’m a big believer that the Virginia National Guard should be used to support U.S. national security, but not to suppress the will of Americans or to support reckless adventurers overseas,” Helmer told The Mercury Tuesday.

Helmer’s proposal comes as Democrats argue the strike represents an unconstitutional expansion of presidential war powers, even as Republicans contend it removed a dangerous authoritarian leader and strengthened U.S. security.

President Donald Trump announced over the weekend that U.S. forces had captured Maduro during a military operation inside Venezuela and that the United States would oversee a transition period in the country.

Trump said the U.S. would “run the country” during the transition, remarks that drew immediate scrutiny from lawmakers concerned about executive overreach.

The operation involved U.S. military strikes and a special forces mission to detain Maduro, who has long been indicted in the United States on drug trafficking and narco-terrorism charges.

Administration officials defended the action as necessary to disrupt drug networks and hold Maduro accountable after years of authoritarian rule.

Helmer cites Guard authority, Venezuelan community, as concerns mount

Trump’s announcement sent shockwaves through Washington and state capitals alike, including in Virginia, which is home to more than 9,000 Venezuelans, according to the most recent U.S. Census Bureau estimates.

Many in that community fled political repression, economic collapse, and violence under Maduro’s government, and have been closely following developments in their home country. Over 7.9 million Venezuelan refugees and migrants have left the country “in search of protection and a better life,” according to UNHCR, the UN Refugee Agency.

Helmer, a former Army officer who served tours in Iraq and Afghanistan, said the strike underscores the need for states to assert their own authority when federal officials bypass Congress and governors in deploying National Guard troops.

His legislation, he said, is rooted in personal experience and concern about unchecked military deployments.

“I lost friends in a war twice in Iraq because politicians lack the courage to stand up and stop a war of choice,” Helmer said, adding that Congress has too often failed to assert its authority before service members are put in harm’s way.

Helmer emphasized that his proposal would require a legal review of certain National Guard deployments, demand disclosure of their scope and justification, and allow the Virginia attorney general to intervene if a deployment is deemed unlawful.

The bill would also prohibit the use of state resources to mobilize the Virginia National Guard against Virginians, against other states, or to influence elections, while stopping short of blocking Guard missions that clearly serve U.S. national security interests.

He said the measure is designed to place guardrails within existing federal law and Supreme Court precedent, giving states greater leverage to challenge what he called reckless or politically motivated uses of military force.

Democrats cite constitutional limits, warn of escalation

Virginia’s congressional Democrats echoed Helmer’s concerns, framing the Venezuela strike as part of a broader pattern of unilateral military action.

U.S. Sen. Tim Kaine, who has spent years pressing Congress to reclaim its constitutional role in authorizing war, condemned the strike as a return to failed interventionist policies.

“President Trump’s unauthorized military attack on Venezuela to arrest Maduro — however terrible he is — is a sickening return to a day when the United States asserted the right to dominate the internal political affairs of all nations in the Western Hemisphere,” Kaine said in a statement.

Kaine warned that bypassing Congress makes it harder for the United States to demand respect for its own sovereignty and questioned where such actions could lead. He said it was “long past time” for Congress to reassert its authority over matters of war and peace.

Alongside Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer, D-N.Y., and Sen. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., Kaine filed a War Powers Resolution last month, seeking to block U.S. military hostilities against Venezuela without congressional authorization. That resolution is expected to come up for a vote next week.

U.S. Sen. Mark R. Warner, vice chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, said the decision to use military force for regime change demands “the closest scrutiny,” particularly given the global implications.

Warner said that while Maduro is a corrupt authoritarian who has repressed his people and overseen stolen elections and mass displacement, those facts do not grant the president authority to ignore constitutional limits.

“If the United States asserts the right to use military force to invade and capture foreign leaders it accuses of criminal conduct, what prevents China from claiming the same authority over Taiwan’s leadership?” Warner said, warning that such precedents invite instability and abuse by authoritarian regimes.

Warner also criticized what he called hypocrisy in the administration’s approach, noting that Trump recently pardoned former Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernández, who was convicted in a U.S. court on serious drug trafficking charges, while claiming similar allegations justified military force in Venezuela.

In the House, U.S. Rep. Bobby Scott, D-Newport News, said he was “deeply concerned” by reports of U.S. military strikes and the capture of a foreign head of state.

Scott said the administration has yet to identify a clear legal basis for its actions in Venezuela or explain how long U.S. involvement could last.

“Escalating military action inside a sovereign country without congressional authorization raises serious questions under both U.S. and international law,” Scott said, adding that military force is among the least effective ways to address drug trafficking compared with education, prevention, and addiction treatment.

U.S. Rep. Suhas Subramanyam, D-Loudoun, a ranking member of the Military and Foreign Affairs Oversight Subcommittee, said the administration’s actions amounted to illegal regime change rather than a legitimate counter-drug effort.

“President Trump said he’d be the ‘Peace President’ and wouldn’t start any new wars, and yet here he is illegally invading another country and kidnapping its President,” Subramanyam said, warning the move could lead to prolonged instability and another “forever war.”

Republicans praise strike, with some urging caution

Republicans in Virginia largely offered a sharply different assessment, praising the operation as decisive and long overdue.

“The strength of the United States is rooted in the courage and dedication of the men and women who serve in our Armed Forces. That strength was on full display,” Kiggans said, thanking U.S. service members for carrying out what she described as a precise and successful mission to apprehend Maduro and disrupt narcotics trafficking.

U.S. Rep. John McGuire, R-Goochland, a former Navy SEAL, also celebrated the strike, linking it to domestic concerns about drug overdoses and border security. He said Venezuela had become a proxy for U.S. adversaries and a source of instability that harmed American communities.

Outgoing Gov. Glenn Youngkin praised Trump’s leadership in a post on X, formerly Twitter, saying accountability for Maduro’s abuses “protects Americans first and foremost” and strengthens democracy and security across the Western Hemisphere.

Attorney General Jason Miyares, who is also set to leave office next week, welcomed Maduro’s arrest, writing that it was “wonderful for the Venezuelan people” to see their leader detained after years of economic collapse under socialist rule.

But not all Republicans were unequivocal in their support.

U.S. Rep. Morgan Griffith, R-Salem, compared the situation to the 1990 U.S. capture of Panamanian leader Manuel Noriega but cautioned against open-ended military engagement.

“I am concerned about U.S. military intervention in foreign countries because of its potential to lead to protracted U.S. engagement,” Griffith said, adding that he would seek more information about future U.S. involvement and insist on congressional oversight.

With the General Assembly set to convene and Congress preparing to vote on war powers, Helmer’s legislation and Kaine’s resolution are set to test how much appetite there is to rein in presidential authority, amid Republican praise for what they describe as a decisive show of American strength.

by Markus Schmidt, Virginia Mercury

Virginia Mercury is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Virginia Mercury maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Samantha Willis for questions: info@virginiamercury.com.