Congress Launches Effort to Take the USA Out of The UN

Republican lawmakers have introduced legislation to withdraw the U.S. from the United Nations, arguing that the global organization undermines American interests. The proposal would cut all U.S. funding and bar future agreements with the UN without Senate approval.

Key Facts:

Legislation Name: Disengaging Entirely From the United Nations Debacle Act of 2025.
Sponsors: Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT), Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), and Rep. Chip Roy (R-TX).
Proposal: Ends U.S. membership and funding for the UN and its affiliated bodies.
Reasoning: Lawmakers say the UN has failed to prevent global crises and often acts against American interests.
Financial Impact: The U.S. contributes over $18 billion annually, covering roughly one-third of the UN’s budget.

The Rest of The Story:

Sen. Mike Lee and Rep. Chip Roy argue that the UN has become a “platform for tyrants” that routinely opposes U.S. interests while relying heavily on American taxpayer dollars.

The legislation aims to cut all U.S. ties to the organization, including funding for UN programs such as the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), which has been linked to concerns over ties to Hamas.

This move aligns with former President Donald Trump’s “America First” foreign policy, which previously sought to limit U.S. engagement with international bodies.

The United Nations has become a platform for tyrants, and a megaphone for people who hate America.

We should stop paying for it and put America first.

Proud to introduce the DEFUND Act with @chiproytx and @RepMikeRogersAL to withdraw the US from the UN.

👇🔗👇🔗👇 pic.twitter.com/JgKfRuLYIU

— Mike Lee (@SenMikeLee) February 20, 2025

While Republicans largely support the bill, Democrats remain divided.

Some have criticized the UN’s handling of the Israel–Hamas conflict, but overall, Democratic lawmakers and liberal-leaning voters tend to support continued U.S. involvement in the organization.

Commentary:

For decades, the United Nations has enjoyed American funding while often working against U.S. values and interests.

The organization has failed in its stated mission to maintain global peace, prevent human rights abuses, and address major crises.

Instead, it frequently undermines American allies, particularly Israel, while giving dictatorships a platform to lecture the free world.

Why should American taxpayers continue footing the bill for an organization that fails to deliver?

The U.S. pays more than any other nation—about one-third of the entire UN budget—yet gets little in return.

The UN has not prevented wars, genocides, or even global pandemics.

It has become a bureaucratic machine that prioritizes globalist agendas over national sovereignty.

This legislation represents a long-overdue reassessment of America’s role in the UN.

The U.S. does not need an international body to dictate foreign policy or redistribute American wealth to countries that routinely oppose its interests.

Instead, we should focus on forming direct alliances that actually benefit the nation’s security and prosperity.

Critics argue that leaving the UN would isolate the U.S. on the global stage, but that claim ignores reality.

America’s power comes from its economy, military, and strategic partnerships—not from membership in a dysfunctional bureaucracy.

Countries will still seek economic and security ties with the U.S., with or without the UN.

The Bottom Line:

This legislation highlights growing frustration with the UN’s inefficiency and anti-American bias.

If passed, it would fundamentally reshape America’s role in global governance, saving billions in taxpayer dollars.

The debate now centers on whether the U.S. should continue funding an organization that often works against its interests—or finally cut ties and move forward on its own terms.