Will Congress Stand Up for Itself This Year? Some Republicans Hope So.

As Republican lawmakers look ahead to the next year of the Trump administration, some have started to appear more comfortable criticizing the president’s most controversial policies, including his administration’s military escalation in Venezuela.

It’s unclear, however, whether the Republican majorities in both chambers are prepared to take the next step and reclaim the full extent of Congress’ authority this year. Several Republicans told NOTUS that they hope so.

“Everyone ought to be cognizant of the job we have, the role and responsibility we have,” Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick told reporters in December. “You got to represent your districts. You got to defend and protect the institution and Article I. We have a role to play in this government. It’s an important one.”

After last week’s strike in Venezuela, in which U.S. forces went into the country and captured President Nicolás Maduro and Trump declared the U.S. would indefinitely “run” the country, Fitzpatrick was firm.

“The only country that the United States of America should be ‘running’ is the United States of America,” he said in a statement, adding, “We must all place paramount importance on lawful process and constitutional responsibility.”

Fitzpatrick has been a leader in the insurgent fight to claw back legislative power. In July, he was one of just two House Republicans to oppose a $9 billion rescission package that gutted congressionally approved foreign aid and public broadcasting programs. More recently, he co-led a bill to restore federal workers’ bargaining rights that passed the House with 20 Republican votes.

But for the most part, Fitzpatrick’s fights have been lonely or unsuccessful ones. While a smattering of other House Republicans have called for Congress to provide a check on Trump, they haven’t typically aligned on the same set of issues. Their lack of resistance has only emboldened the president.

On the last legislative business day of 2025, for example, Trump declared that the trustee board of the Kennedy Center would rename the iconic performing arts center the “Trump Kennedy Center.”

The decades-old laws that established the Kennedy Center outright ban changing the building’s name. Two Republican lawmakers, Reps. Bob Onder and Mike Simpson, recently introduced laws to change the name in Trump’s honor, apparently acknowledging the role of Congress in the matter. After all, renaming even a post office requires a formal act of Congress.

As with other moves this year, including his rebranding of the Department of Defense as the “Department of War,” Trump did not see fit to seek congressional approval to rename the historic federal building.

When historians assess the first year of Trump’s second term, the Kennedy Center’s name might amount to little more than a footnote in his relationship with Congress. Under Trump’s direction, the executive branch has circumvented the legislative branch’s authority on appropriations, tariffs, war powers and myriad other issues. While some Republican lawmakers have offered objections, for the most part, the GOP-controlled Congress has been a willing partner in its own subordination.

Next Congress, the dynamics might be different, particularly on tariffs.

“We’ve been diminished, and we should be an equal branch,” Rep. Don Bacon told NOTUS in December.

“We should be directing immigration policy, tariff policy, doing a lot more on foreign affairs,” he added. “I mean, the president, the secretary of state works for him, but we have a role in it. So we should be more directive, I believe.”

After the operation in Venezuela, Bacon supported Maduro’s ouster but raised similar concerns with NOTUS about the role of Congress.

“There was little effort by the administration to inform Congress on mission or intentions,” he said. “I don’t condone that. Are we better off with Maduro gone? Yes, but I don’t defend the lack of coordination with Congress.”

Sen. Lisa Murkowski, who frequently bucks the Trump administration, said in a post on X that she was “hopeful” his capture made the world a “safer place,” but she took issue with the lack of congressional authority.

“Late last year, I voted to proceed to debate on two resolutions that would have terminated the escalation of U.S. military operations against Venezuela absent explicit authorization from Congress,” she said. “I took these votes because I believed the administration failed to provide Congress with the information necessary to fully evaluate the legal basis for these escalating actions. That was true then, and it remains true today.”

While it’s unclear how Congress will proceed on the Venezuela matter, the legislative branch may get the opportunity to assert itself on the tariff issue next year. The House voted in September to block challenges to Trump’s global tariffs through March 2026, when Congress will have to vote on the matter again unless the Supreme Court deems the tariffs unlawful.

But Speaker Mike Johnson did not sound eager to stand in Trump’s way during a recent interview with Fox Business.

“I’m a jealous guardian of Article 1 of the Constitution. I mean, the legislative branch is the most important,” Johnson said. “And I’m in charge of that in the House, but I don’t think the president has overstepped his bounds. I think he’s used that tariff authority wisely. And it’s given him leverage in the strategy on these trade agreements. A lot of good has come out of that. I think the court should give deference to the Article 2 branch. And hopefully it continues.”

Congress will also have the chance to pass full-year appropriations bills in 2026. After Elon Musk and Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought slashed billions of dollars in federal programs without congressional approval, Republicans only codified a fraction of the cuts.

One senior House appropriator, Rep. Mario Díaz-Balart, did try to add a provision blocking the administration’s so-called “pocket rescissions” to a spending bill. The strategy, masterminded by Vought, involves Trump requesting to withhold congressionally approved money. But the request reaches Congress so late in the fiscal year that the legislative branch doesn’t have enough time to act, and the administration considers the money rescinded.

The White House intervened to stop Díaz-Balart, as NOTUS reported, and the provision never saw the light of day.

But appropriators told NOTUS that they believe a complete, Republican-led appropriations process that clearly directs the White House’s spending is the best way to rein in Trump. After all, most of the government is operating off of a budget passed during the Biden administration, making it easy for White House officials to argue they need to take government spending into their own hands.

“If your aim is to put limits on executive power, the best way to do that is to pass appropriations, in my view,” Appropriations Chair Tom Cole told reporters.

It’s not just moderates and appropriators in the conference noticing the amount of authority Congress has handed to the White House.

When NOTUS asked Rep. Darrell Issa, a leadership ally, about the Trump administration releasing an application process for “gold card visas” without congressional involvement, he blamed the House for not taking up H-1B reform, which, he said, allowed the Biden administration to increase revenues and fees without Congress.

“Is it another potential passing of authority from Congress to the other branch by benign or not-so-benign neglect?” Issa asked. “Yes.”

“But who are we to blame but ourselves?” he continued. “If we’d passed our H1-B reform, we’d have not only more revenue, but we would have a clear statement from Congress. But we don’t have that.”

If and when all else fails, some House Republicans have explored another avenue of reclaiming their power — discharge petitions.

Frustrated by GOP leadership refusing to advance legislation that would compel the release of files related to Jeffrey Epstein, Rep. Thomas Massie offered a petition to force a vote on the floor. Massie’s months-long campaign was successful, and his bill forced the Department of Justice to release hundreds of thousands of documents.

Massie is not alone in deploying the discharge petition strategy. A handful of Republicans have led or signed on to measures ranging from banning congressional stock trading to extending Affordable Care Act tax subsidies.

That model, Massie told NOTUS, could be used similarly to force leadership to push back on the Trump administration.

“Mike Johnson has given the keys to the car to President Trump, but we wrestled the keys back and took them for a spin and got the Epstein Act passed right,” Massie told NOTUS. “There may be more discharge petitions, as long as the speaker keeps things bottled up and just does whatever the president does and keeps everything else from happening.”

And as 2026 begins, more Republican lawmakers sound open to Massie’s ideas.

“It is time for the House in particular to reassert itself when it comes to key policy issues,” Rep. Kevin Kiley told NOTUS.