Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Foreign Policy Nato topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bipartisan push for amendment to bar funding for aggression against a NATO country after presidential remarks on Greenland
Summary
Several House members urged the Rules Committee to make in order an amendment that would prohibit use of appropriated funds to invade or coerce a NATO ally, citing presidential remarks about Greenland. Speakers said the amendment would reassure allies and preserve NATO cohesion.
Amid testimony on the appropriations packages, members from both parties sought to add an amendment barring any use of funds to invade or coerce a NATO member. Rep. Steny Hoyer and Rep. Seth Keating led the push, arguing that language explicitly preventing use of Department of Defense appropriations for an attack on an ally would reassure partners after President Trump’s public comments about Greenland.
"Taking Greenland is as unpopular as it is unnecessary," Hoyer said, urging the committee to allow an up‑or‑down vote on the House floor. Keating and other supporters said the amendment is bipartisan and would codify what both the executive and congressional branches have now publicly stated: the U.S. will not invade a NATO nation.
Opponents argued the president had already said he did not intend to use force and that existing bill language extolling the importance of NATO should suffice; proponents replied that a statutory prohibition would be a stronger, clearer reassurance to allies.
Committee members did not resolve the rules question during testimony; they said floor consideration would determine whether the amendment is made in order.
