The Trump administration is on course to blow past an initial deadline for congressional approval for the Iran war on the grounds that the ongoing cease-fire stopped the clock on a 60-day deadline—an assertion met with outrage from Democrats and skepticism from Republicans on Capitol Hill.
Under a 1973 law called the War Powers Resolution, the president is required to notify Congress within 48 hours of military action and withdraw U.S. troops 60 days later, unless lawmakers declare war or authorize the use of force. The expectation on Capitol Hill was that the 60-day deadline expires on Friday.
In testimony Thursday before the Senate Armed Services Committee, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said the current cease-fire with Iran, which began April 8, stopped the countdown.
While Trump halted airstrikes against Iran, the U.S. military continues to enforce a military blockade that prohibits ships from reaching or leaving Iranian ports. A blockade is considered an act of war under international law.
“We are in a cease-fire right now, which our understanding means the 60-day clock pauses or stops in a cease-fire,” Hegseth said. “That’s—it’s our understanding.”
Under the law, the 60-day period can be extended for 30 days if the president certifies to Congress in writing that the continued use of force is needed to safely withdraw U.S. troops.
Sen. Tim Kaine (D., Va.) pushed back on Hegseth’s suggestion that the cease-fire paused the clock, saying “I do not believe the statute would support that.”
Hegseth deferred to the White House on Kaine’s question about whether Trump intends to seek congressional approval for the war eventually, or send Congress the legally-required certification that he needs an additional 30 days to withdraw forces.
“It’s going to pose a really important legal question for the administration,” Kaine said, noting that “we have serious constitutional concerns.”
Some Republicans also expressed skepticism about Hegseth’s argument.
“It stopped from the cease-fire? Which cease-fire? Does the cease-fire still count if they don’t cease firing?” said Sen. Todd Young (R., Ind.). “I don’t know. Is there any legal precedent to this? I mean, these are the sorts of questions members would ask.”
Young said he expected the administration to follow up Hegseth’s comments by making a formal legal argument to Congress.
Sen. Josh Hawley (R., Mo.) said: “The right way to make that argument to Congress would be to put that in writing and send that up here to us,” he said.
In the absence of official notification or request for extension, Hawley said Congress would probably need to debate legislation to authorize the war. “I don’t really want to do that, because I don’t want to open up further conflict. I want to wind it down,” he said.
Sen. Thom Tillis (R., N.C.) questioned whether Hegseth understood the law. “I’ll let my legal experts tell me if they agree…I felt like the War Powers Resolution says in 60 days you have to take some action.”
Sen. John Curtis (R., Utah) had previously said he wouldn’t support continued operations against Iran—or vote to fund the war effort—beyond the 60-day deadline, in the absence of congressional approval.
On Thursday, Curtis said in a statement that the law is clear: After 60 days, military action must begin to wind down without formal congressional authorization.
“As we reach this 60-day mark, it is time for decision-making from both the administration and from Congress—and that can happen in league with one another, not in conflict,” he said.
Curtis added that he is engaged in discussions with Senate colleagues and the administration “on a path forward that honors our respective constitutional roles, clearly outlines objectives and guidelines, and is in the best interest of the country and our servicemembers.”
He didn’t give details about those talks, but a small group of Republicans have been privately discussing how to draft legislation to authorize the use of military force in Iran. Congress passed such measures, known as AUMFs, for the First Gulf War, the Iraq war and the Afghanistan War.
Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R., Alaska) said in a speech Thursday that she would introduce an Iran AUMF—with guardrails and reporting requirements—when the Senate reconvenes on May 11. “It’s not a blank check,” Murkowski said.
Authorizations should precede wars, not be enacted in their midst, she added. “That wasn’t a choice for us here, but it cannot be used as an excuse to abandon our responsibilities.”
Before leaving Washington for a weeklong recess Thursday afternoon, the Senate blocked a resolution that would have directed Trump to remove troops from hostilities against Iran unless he obtained congressional approval. All Republicans voted no except for Sens. Susan Collins of Maine and Rand Paul of Kentucky, who voted with most Democrats to advance the measure.
For Collins, the most vulnerable Republican senator up for re-election this year, the 60-day deadline was decisive. Thursday’s vote was the sixth time since the war began that senators had weighed in on whether to rein in Trump’s war powers in Iran. The first five times, Collins voted no. This time, she voted yes.
The president’s authority as commander in chief isn’t without limits, Collins said. She said the Constitution “gives Congress an essential role in decisions of war and peace, and the War Powers Act establishes a clear 60-day deadline for Congress to either authorize or end U.S. involvement in foreign hostilities.”
“That deadline is not a suggestion; it is a requirement,” Collins said.
Write to Lara Seligman at lara.seligman@wsj.com and Lindsay Wise at lindsay.wise@wsj.com
