The Hill reports Sen. Jeanne Shaheen has held up a $2.8 billion weapons package for Israel, adding another Democratic roadblock to the Trump administration’s planned sale.
Shaheen, the top Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, placed her hold in July. Rep. Gregory Meeks, her House counterpart from New York, announced his own hold Wednesday.
Their action could delay a package that includes 40,000 one-ton bombs. It also lets two lawmakers impede a major arms transfer without first winning a vote by the full House or Senate.
Shaheen cited Israel’s conduct in Gaza, its bombing in Syria and Israeli settler violence in the West Bank. She also questioned what those actions mean for a peaceful outcome in the Middle East.
The Hill quoted Shaheen criticizing Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s handling of those concerns.
“Netanyahu needs to hear from America that we don’t like what he’s doing. We don’t like what’s happening in the West Bank where settler violence is killing Palestinians, sending them out of their homes, disrupting basic infrastructure. And the Netanyahu administration has basically done nothing to address that,”
The hold operates through an informal consultation process. The State Department works with designated lawmakers to address their concerns before moving forward with certain large weapons sales.
That arrangement gives the ranking Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee considerable power. Shaheen can hold back the administration while officials seek her approval, even though Republicans control the Senate.
Senate committees often shape policy long before a measure reaches the floor, whether the dispute involves arms sales or a stalled administration nominee. In this case, an informal objection carries consequences measured in billions of dollars.
Meeks raised a related concern. He questioned whether Netanyahu’s government would use American weapons in line with U.S. law and international humanitarian law.
The holds reflect mistrust among leading Democrats toward Israel’s government. Yet they do not reflect the position taken by most senators during recent attempts to block other arms packages.
In April 2025, the Senate rejected Sen. Bernie Sanders’s effort to stop an $8.8 billion arms sale to Israel. Breitbart reported that one proposal failed 15-83, with support falling from 19 votes during a similar push months earlier.
Fox News reported that both measures in the April effort received only 15 votes. The failed resolutions allowed the Trump administration’s planned sale to proceed.
That wide margin matters. Shaheen and Meeks are using committee positions to slow a policy that opponents have struggled to defeat through recorded votes.
The clash also fits a wider debate over congressional and presidential authority. Similar questions arise when lawmakers consider an Iran war powers resolution, though the legal process differs from an informal arms-sale hold.
Another Senate attempt came in November 2024. Three resolutions sought to block parts of an authorized arms package worth about $20 billion, including tank rounds, mortar rounds and guided bomb equipment.
The Senate rejected all three. The New York Post reported that 19 senators, including 17 Democrats and two independents, supported at least one effort to halt part of the transfer.
The Washington Examiner noted that more than one-third of Democratic senators backed restrictions in that vote. Opposition had grown inside the party, but it remained well short of a Senate majority.
President Donald Trump had lifted a partial embargo imposed by President Joe Biden, who withheld some heavy precision bombs from Israel. That decision allowed the restricted shipments to resume.
Trump’s action placed the United States back behind an ally facing continuing security threats. Shaheen and Meeks are now using a separate procedural path to impede another package.
The dispute shows why control over congressional procedure can matter as much as a final vote. That same principle runs through fights over sweeping Russia sanctions, where a few lawmakers can shape what reaches the president’s desk.
Shaheen’s stated concerns focus heavily on Palestinian casualties. Palestinian health officials estimate that 70,000 Palestinians died during the three-year Israel-Hamas war, though their figure does not separate militants from civilians.
That missing distinction matters in any debate over military conduct. Civilian deaths deserve scrutiny, but casualty totals that combine combatants and civilians cannot answer every question lawmakers are raising.
The exact July date of Shaheen’s hold was not identified. The specific arms-sale authorization and delivery schedule also remain unclear beyond the stated inclusion of 40,000 one-ton bombs.
No response from the Israeli government to Shaheen’s objections was described. Nor was any specific action identified that would satisfy Shaheen or Meeks and release their holds.
Those gaps leave the Trump administration facing an open-ended process. The State Department can address the lawmakers’ concerns, but the informal nature of the system gives the public little clarity about the standard for approval.
Congress has every right to debate foreign policy, including through measures that define presidential power. But transparency matters when lawmakers use procedure to stall security decisions without a clear vote.
An ally’s defense should not hinge on an opaque courtesy controlled by two lawmakers. If Congress wants to block the sale, it should debate the case and vote in public.