WASHINGTON — The House is set to vote Thursday on legislation requiring President Donald Trump to withdraw from the Iran conflict, a pivotal moment testing congressional authority over military engagements launched without congressional approval. The resolution, backed by Democrats and a growing number of Republicans, aims to invoke the War Powers Resolution of 1973, which mandates that presidents notify Congress within 48 hours of military deployments and withdraw forces after 60 days without authorization.
Previous attempts to curtail Trump's military campaign have failed, but lawmakers now believe this vote could mark a turning point. The measure follows a pattern where four Republican senators recently supported a similar resolution in the Senate, with three absent from the vote. While Senate leaders anticipate blocking a final vote Thursday once all members are present, the House resolution represents a renewed congressional effort to rein in presidential war powers.
Frustration with the war has intensified on Capitol Hill as the Strait of Hormuz stalemate disrupts global shipping, causing oil prices to spike and U.S. gasoline costs to reach $4.53 per gallon. 'Congress has a constitutional duty. It has a duty to act, not to cheerlead, especially not to cheerlead an open-ended war of choice,' stated Democratic Representative Gregory Meeks, who spearheaded the House resolution. Though the lone Democrat who opposed the measure last week, Rep. Jared Golden, plans to support it this time, key vote outcomes hang in the balance as multiple lawmakers remain absent.
The White House maintains the War Powers Resolution no longer applies due to the recent Iran ceasefire, while Trump himself has set contradictory deadlines—threatening 'a full, large scale assault' on Iran if negotiations fail but pausing strikes when Gulf allies negotiated. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth's 'incompetence' has drawn criticism from Republican Senator Thom Tillis, who called for a military authorization vote. Meanwhile, Democratic Senator Tammy Duckworth condemned Trump's approach as 'strategic blunder,' noting Iran's new leadership now 'puts a chokehold on commercial shipping.'
Republican leaders defend Trump's 'bold action' against a long-standing adversary, with House Foreign Affairs Committee Chair Brian Mast asserting, 'I’m an American. I don’t believe in getting hit and walking away.' Yet the conflict has triggered a looming legal showdown over the constitutionality of the 1973 law, with Trump arguing it is unconstitutional. The resolution, which would take effect without his signature if passed by both chambers, underscores a fundamental clash between executive power and congressional oversight during an active war. As the House prepares its vote, the stakes have never been higher for both the war's continuation and the future of military authorization in the U.S. government.}
Previous attempts to curtail Trump's military campaign have failed, but lawmakers now believe this vote could mark a turning point. The measure follows a pattern where four Republican senators recently supported a similar resolution in the Senate, with three absent from the vote. While Senate leaders anticipate blocking a final vote Thursday once all members are present, the House resolution represents a renewed congressional effort to rein in presidential war powers.
Frustration with the war has intensified on Capitol Hill as the Strait of Hormuz stalemate disrupts global shipping, causing oil prices to spike and U.S. gasoline costs to reach $4.53 per gallon. 'Congress has a constitutional duty. It has a duty to act, not to cheerlead, especially not to cheerlead an open-ended war of choice,' stated Democratic Representative Gregory Meeks, who spearheaded the House resolution. Though the lone Democrat who opposed the measure last week, Rep. Jared Golden, plans to support it this time, key vote outcomes hang in the balance as multiple lawmakers remain absent.
The White House maintains the War Powers Resolution no longer applies due to the recent Iran ceasefire, while Trump himself has set contradictory deadlines—threatening 'a full, large scale assault' on Iran if negotiations fail but pausing strikes when Gulf allies negotiated. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth's 'incompetence' has drawn criticism from Republican Senator Thom Tillis, who called for a military authorization vote. Meanwhile, Democratic Senator Tammy Duckworth condemned Trump's approach as 'strategic blunder,' noting Iran's new leadership now 'puts a chokehold on commercial shipping.'
Republican leaders defend Trump's 'bold action' against a long-standing adversary, with House Foreign Affairs Committee Chair Brian Mast asserting, 'I’m an American. I don’t believe in getting hit and walking away.' Yet the conflict has triggered a looming legal showdown over the constitutionality of the 1973 law, with Trump arguing it is unconstitutional. The resolution, which would take effect without his signature if passed by both chambers, underscores a fundamental clash between executive power and congressional oversight during an active war. As the House prepares its vote, the stakes have never been higher for both the war's continuation and the future of military authorization in the U.S. government.}
