A DBUNK subscriber flagged this article for review, concerned about whether Rubio bypassed Congress and if the move was illegal. Misinformation about foreign arms deals is widespread, so we investigated the legitimacy of the claims.
What the Article Gets Wrong
The New York Times article claims that “Secretary of State Marco Rubio has invoked ’emergency authorities’ to bypass Congress and send $4 billion in weapons to Israel.” While it is true that emergency provisions allow the executive branch to expedite arms sales without prior congressional approval, the article misleads readers by implying that this act was extraordinary, possibly illegal, and unusual.
Under the Arms Export Control Act, the Secretary of State has the ability to authorize emergency military sales without congressional approval in situations deemed urgent. Multiple past administrations have used this authority, including Presidents Biden, Trump, and Obama. This law has existed for decades and has been invoked multiple times without legal repercussions.
Missing Context About Prior Use of Emergency Powers
The article does not clarify that previous secretaries of state have invoked the same emergency powers Rubio used. For example, in 2019, then-Secretary of State Mike Pompeo bypassed Congress to approve an $8 billion arms sale to Saudi Arabia and the UAE. The article frames Rubio’s action as highly unusual without acknowledging its precedent.
By omitting prior instances, the article fuels the perception that this move is unprecedented when it falls within legal norms practiced by both Republican and Democratic administrations.
Is This Illegal? Could Rubio Be Prosecuted?
Many readers asked whether bypassing Congress in this way is illegal or if prosecution could follow. The short answer is no. Under existing U.S. law, the executive branch has the authority to expedite certain critical arms sales without congressional approval under emergency declarations. While certain lawmakers might object, legal precedent supports this authority.
What could happen is Congress passing new legislation to restrict this power, but at present, no laws were broken. Historical pushback against such declarations has come in the form of political criticism rather than prosecutions.
Conclusion
The article presents an accurate event but frames it misleadingly by omitting critical context. The emergency authority used by Rubio is longstanding and has been exercised by previous administrations. While controversial, this practice is legal and does not indicate criminal wrongdoing.
To cut through the noise and get transparent, fact-checked news, download the DBUNK app today.
Read the original article here: New York Times
