SJRES-1-115
Became Public Law No: 115-18.
Sponsored by John Boozman (R-AR)
What it does
This joint resolution approves a specific location in the Washington, D.C. area for a national memorial honoring members of the U.S. Armed Forces who served on active duty during Operation Desert Storm or Operation Desert Shield. The memorial itself was previously authorized by the Carl Levin and Howard P. 'Buck' McKeon National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015. This resolution completes a required step in the federal memorial approval process by designating where the memorial would be built.
Who benefits
Veterans who served in Operation Desert Storm or Operation Desert Shield (approximately 700,000 U.S. service members), their families, and descendants who would have a dedicated national memorial recognizing their service. The general public and visitors to Washington, D.C. who would have access to the memorial site. Memorial design and construction contractors who would receive work from the project.
Who is hurt
Depending on the specific site chosen, nearby residents, businesses, or existing park users in the Washington, D.C. area could experience disruption during construction. Other memorial or monument projects competing for limited available space on or near the National Mall could face reduced site options as a result of this designation.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that the roughly 700,000 Americans who served in Operations Desert Storm and Desert Shield answered their country's call and helped liberate Kuwait from Iraqi occupation in 1991, yet have waited decades without a dedicated national memorial. A permanent monument in the nation's capital would provide long-overdue recognition of their sacrifice and service, offer a place of remembrance for veterans and their families, and ensure this chapter of American military history is preserved for future generations. The location approval is a routine, necessary procedural step to move a congressionally authorized memorial forward.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that the Washington, D.C. memorial landscape is already densely developed, and adding another monument raises concerns about the long-term stewardship and visual coherence of the National Mall and surrounding federal parkland. Some critics contend that the Commemorative Works Act's site-approval process exists precisely to carefully manage limited public space, and that each new approval sets a precedent making it harder to preserve open areas. Others may question whether a conflict of relatively short duration warrants a permanent national memorial on par with those honoring longer or larger-scale military engagements.
Constitutional context
Congress holds authority over federal property and the District of Columbia under Article I, Section 8, which grants Congress power to exercise exclusive legislation over the seat of government. The Commemorative Works Act (40 U.S.C. §§ 8901–8909) establishes the statutory framework requiring congressional approval for memorial locations on federal land in D.C. No significant case law — such as Youngstown v. Sawyer (1952), Hamdi v. Rumsfeld (2004), or Boumediene v. Bush (2008) — is directly implicated, as this bill does not involve military operations, detention, or executive war powers.
Checks and balances
Congress retains authority over the use of federal land in Washington, D.C., and this resolution exercises that authority by approving the memorial's location. No significant shift in power between branches occurs; the executive branch (through the National Park Service and other agencies) would oversee construction and maintenance, consistent with existing statutory roles.
Historical precedent
Congress has used similar joint resolutions to approve memorial locations under the Commemorative Works Act, including site approvals for the World War II Memorial (2001) and the Martin Luther King Jr. Memorial (1996), following the same two-step process of authorization followed by location approval.