Key Takeaways
A constitutional clash over presidential war powers is escalating as the White House claims the 60-day limit for military action against Iran has been suspended, effectively neutralizing a deadline that Democrats and some Republicans see as a critical check on the conflict.
"The 60-day clock pauses or stops in a cease-fire," Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said during Senate testimony Thursday, arguing the administration does not need to seek congressional authorization to continue the operation that began on February 28. "That's our understanding, just so you know."
The interpretation hinges on a ceasefire announced on April 7. The administration's argument is that this halt in active fighting stops the clock stipulated by the 1973 War Powers Resolution, which requires a president to terminate hostilities within 60 days unless Congress declares war or provides an Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF). That 60-day period, which began with a formal notification to Congress on March 2, expires May 1. The conflict has cost an estimated $25 billion to date, according to Defense Department officials.
"After we cross that 60-day threshold, there can be no more doubts that he's violating the War Powers Act," Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer said, rejecting the administration's legal theory. The dispute sets the stage for a significant confrontation over a law passed in the wake of the Vietnam War to rein in presidential authority, a law that has been challenged by presidents of both parties for decades.
The White House and its top congressional allies are presenting a united front, arguing that Congress should not interfere with sensitive negotiations. House Speaker Mike Johnson, a Republican from Louisiana, told reporters Thursday, "We are not at war," adding that Congress has no role to play while the administration is trying to "broker a peace." This position was echoed by a White House official who warned against attempts to "score political points by usurping the Commander-in-Chief’s authority."
Democrats, however, have repeatedly tried to force the issue. The Senate on Thursday rejected a sixth attempt to pass a War Powers Resolution to end the military action, with the measure failing on a 47-50 vote. "How many War Powers Resolutions do Democrats need to put forward before Senate Republicans do what’s right?" Schumer asked in a Senate speech.
The political maneuvering comes as the war's costs mount. Public opinion polls show the conflict is unpopular, with President Trump's approval rating sinking to its lowest level this month as Americans connect the war to higher costs of living.
While the Republican party has largely backed the president, some cracks are beginning to appear. Senator John Curtis of Utah, a Republican, wrote in a recent essay that while he supported the initial actions, he would not support ongoing military force beyond the deadline without a congressional vote.
This sentiment reflects a growing dilemma for Republicans who have historically supported a strong executive on foreign policy but are now faced with an unpopular conflict and a looming legal deadline. Senator John Thune, the Republican majority leader, acknowledged it would be "ideal" to reach a peace agreement but did not rule out a potential vote on authorizing the war.
The administration has not ruled out further military action. A U.S. official confirmed that President Trump was scheduled to receive a briefing on plans for fresh strikes to compel Iran to negotiate. Tehran has stated that any new attacks would be met with "long and painful strikes" on U.S. positions, a threat that complicates efforts to build an international coalition to secure the vital Strait of Hormuz shipping lane.
This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice.
