The war in Iran is increasingly fracturing Republicans on Capitol Hill as the administration approaches a 60-day deadline that could force President Donald Trump to begin winding down the Middle East conflict that has stretched for over two months now.
Trump is staring down a Friday deadline set by the 1973 War Powers Resolution that limits a president’s unilateral military action, a law Democrats have unsuccessfully tried to invoke five times to curtail the overseas operations without congressional approval. Trump can seek authorization from Congress to continue the war, end it, or grant himself a one-time 30-day extension with limitations against offensive operations.
Recommended Stories
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), a close Trump ally and staunch proponent for armed intervention in Iran and other hostile nations, has another idea.
“If I were them, I’d completely ignore” the deadline, Graham told the Washington Examiner in a brief interview. “I’ve always thought it’s been unconstitutional.”
Past presidents in both parties have held similar views that the commander in chief holds broader constitutional war powers than are afforded by the Vietnam War-era law. In 2011, for example, the White House under President Barack Obama insisted it held the authority to continue war in Libya beyond the 60-day mark because there were neither “sustained fighting or active” gunfights nor U.S. troops on the ground. Some Republicans have drawn comparisons to Iran, citing weeks of ceasefire with no offensive strikes.
But there’s a growing faction of Republicans, many of whom previously cited the 60-day mark as an inflection point for the war, who are increasingly uneasy about the lack of congressional approval and the economic fallout, making their affordability messaging go up in flames ahead of the midterm elections. They want Congress to make an official determination, and for the administration to notify them of an extension if it chooses to use one.
The administration “is in active conversations with the Hill on this topic,” according to a White House official, who was granted anonymity to discuss ongoing deliberations. “Members of Congress who try to score political points by usurping the commander in chief’s authority would only undermine the United States military abroad, which no elected official should want to do.”
Senate Appropriations Committee Chairwoman Susan Collins (R-ME), a centrist up for reelection in a battleground race, told the Washington Examiner that Congress should “either authorize the military action or block it.”
“I think we should follow the law,” Collins said. “Sixty days is the endpoint for unilateral, non-congressionally approved military hostilities, except for winding down activities.”
Sen. John Curtis (R-UT) expressed similar concerns, saying a 30-day extension is “part of the conversation” over how lawmakers should respond but added that “we, being Congress, need to be watching the 60 days and … either authorize or not authorize action.”
Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC), a retiring centrist, said lawmakers “need details” about objectives, costs, and what success looks like, but would prefer that Congress greenlight the war with an Authorization for Use of Military Force.
In the latest example of the war drawing unconventional battle lines within the GOP, Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO), a populist conservative, would “prefer not to do that because I don’t really want to authorize the war. I want to end it.”
“I would really rather not ramp up a war effort that I think the president is trying to wind down, and I think he’s right to wind down,” Hawley said. “There’s a number of certifications they can make, but they need to say something. So, hopefully they will.”
In his first congressional testimony since the start of the war on Feb. 28, War Secretary Pete Hegseth told the House Armed Services Committee Wednesday that the “biggest adversaries we face at this point are the reckless, feckless, and defeatist words of congressional Democrats and some Republicans two months in.”
Hegseth will testify to the Senate Armed Services Committee on Thursday. In an appeal for more transparency and in what appeared to be a slight against Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Jim Risch (R-ID), Sen. Todd Young (R-IN) said the panel should “help out the institution and members by holding some war powers-related oversight hearings.” Absent those, Young plans to “watch with great interest the Armed Services Committee and hope that, perhaps, they can assume the role of asking questions about war powers.”
“If that sounds passive-aggressive, I hope it doesn’t,” Young added. “But if it catalyzes the committee to actually announce a hearing, I wouldn’t lament that.”
HEGSETH AND CAINE’S FIRST PUBLIC HEARING ON IRAN WAR DOMINATED BY PARTISAN CLASHES
Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) has dodged whether the Senate will take any action, suggesting to reporters that more information on the administration’s plans was needed. He said a “cessation of hostilities” would “not, obviously, trigger” the 60-day deadline. The Senate is scheduled to leave Washington on Thursday for a scheduled recess until May 11.
“But, obviously, our members are interested in paying attention to what’s happening there and kind of what the administration’s plans are,” Thune added of Iran.
Christian Datoc contributed to this report.
