US lawmakers are trying to pressure the Trump administration to release video of a controversial double-tap military strike by limiting Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth's travel budget.
The incident on September 2, in which the US carried out a second deadly strike on a boat in the Caribbean, has raised fresh questions about the legality of Trump's campaign targeting alleged drug-carrying vessels.
A provision buried in a lengthy defence spending policy would restrict travel funds for Hegseth's office until the Pentagon hands over unedited footage. The bill is expected to pass with support from both parties.
US President Donald Trump says release of the video is something for Hegseth to decide.
Trump denied that he had previously said he would have no problem with the footage being made public - despite that comment being made on camera as recently as Wednesday.
The threat from Congress to withhold money from Hegseth's travel budget has emerged amid a clamour for information from lawmakers on both sides of the political aisle.
It is buried within a 3,000-page draft bill that is focused on approving next year's defence spending, authorising nearly $901bn in funding.
The wording states that Hegseth's office may spend no more than three-quarters of the available travel funds for 2026 until it meets certain requirements. This includes an obligation to provide the House and Senate armed service committees all unedited video of strikes conducted against designated terrorist organizations in the area of responsibility of the United States Southern Command.
The wording nods to the way Trump has characterised his strikes on boats in the Caribbean and Pacific, stating they aim to target terrorist organisations.
In response to lawmakers' scrutiny, Trump asserted that each of the alleged drug boats sunk had saved 25,000 American lives, claiming that drug trafficking to the US by sea had almost ceased.
While some experts raise questions regarding the legality of the strikes, Trump's administration maintains its actions conform to the laws of armed conflict. The second strike on the September incident has been highlighted for allegedly disregarding the principle of not attacking surviving individuals.
Concerns regarding the appropriateness of the strikes have been echoed by members across both political parties in Congress.
Despite bipartisan apprehensions, Trump's narrative remains that the military actions are necessary and lawful, with Hegseth under intense scrutiny about the decision-making process.
As political maneuvers unfold, the administration continues to confront questions surrounding its military strategies and transparency commitments.
}
