A 60-Day
Deadline Could Pressure Trump on Ending the Iran War
A
decades-old law allows the president to wage war without congressional approval
for 60 days, then limits his options for continuing. President Trump may seek
to get around it.
Robert
Jimison
By Robert
Jimison
Reporting
from the Capitol
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/22/us/politics/war-powers-act-explanation.html
April 22,
2026
Over
nearly eight weeks of war in Iran, Republicans in Congress have turned back
repeated efforts by Democrats to halt the operation and force President Trump,
who began the conflict without congressional authorization, to consult with
lawmakers on the military campaign.
But some
in the G.O.P. have signaled that a key statutory deadline in the coming weeks
could be an inflection point when they will expect the president to either wind
down the conflict or seek congressional approval to continue it.
Democrats
have tried and failed several times to invoke a provision of the 1973 War
Powers Resolution, a law aimed at curbing a president’s ability to wage war
without congressional approval, to challenge the conflict in Iran. The latest
defeat came on Wednesday, when Senate Republicans blocked such a measure for
the fifth time since the war began.
Yet the
law also establishes a set of deadlines, the first of which is coming on May 1,
that could increase the pressure on the Trump administration in the coming
days. Here is what the law says about how long a president can continue to
direct U.S. forces in a conflict without congressional approval.
The
60-Day Mark
When the
United States began joint strikes with the Israeli air force on Feb. 28, the
president said he was acting under his authority as commander in chief to
protect U.S. bases in the Middle East, and to “advance vital United States
national interests.” He said the action was taken in “collective self-defense
of our regional allies, including Israel.”
Many
Democrats disputed that justification and have continued to argue that Mr.
Trump acted illegally. White House officials and most Republicans on Capitol
Hill say he is operating within the bounds of the war powers statute, which
sets a 60-day clock for a president to remove American forces from hostilities
without congressional authorization to use military force.
Although
the war began at the end of February, Mr. Trump formally notified Congress of
the operation on March 2, starting the 60-day period that ends on May 1.
Some
Republicans have already signaled they will not support any extension beyond 60
days.
Senator
John Curtis, Republican of Utah, wrote in an opinion essay earlier this month
that he “will not support ongoing military action beyond a 60-day window
without congressional approval.”
Other
Republicans, including Representative Brian Mast of Florida, who chairs the
Foreign Affairs Committee, warned that the president could lose significant
support if the conflict continued into May.
Moments
after Republicans just barely blocked a war powers resolution in the House last
week, Mr. Mast said there could be “a different vote count after 60 days,”
alluding to the May 1 deadline.
A 30-Day
Extension
Under the
statute, once the initial 60-day deadline passes, the president’s options for
continuing a military campaign without congressional approval become limited.
At that point, Mr. Trump would effectively have three choices: seek
congressional authorization to continue the campaign, begin winding down U.S.
involvement or give himself an extension.
The law
allows a one-time, 30-day extension of the deployment if the president
certifies in writing that additional time is necessary to facilitate the safe
withdrawal of U.S. forces, but it does not grant authority to continue waging
an offensive campaign.
Congress
Can Authorize the War
Lawmakers
also have the option at any time of granting explicit permission for Mr. Trump
to continue the operation by passing an authorization for the use of military
force. Such measures have become the primary way Congress approves military
campaigns short of a formal declaration of war, something that has not been
done since World War II.
While
Republicans have largely united in blocking Democrats’ attempts to halt the
war, it is unclear whether the same unity exists when it comes to affirmatively
authorizing the conflict.
Senator
Lisa Murkowski, Republican of Alaska, has said she is working with a group of
senators on a formal authorization for the use of military force against Iran,
but has yet to introduce the resolution.
Congress
has not voted in favor of using military force since 2002, when lawmakers
authorized it against Iraq.
Ms.
Murkowski was an early critic of the administration’s lack of transparency
around the objectives, costs and timeline for the war, and said that her goal
with an authorization vote would be to reassert congressional authority and
require the administration to be held to firm parameters for the operation.
Why Trump
Might Ignore the Deadlines
Administrations
led by presidents of both parties have long argued that the Constitution gives
broad authority to the commander in chief, meaning that the limits the war
powers law places on the president are unconstitutional.
In 2011,
President Barack Obama continued a military engagement in Libya beyond the
60-day mark, arguing that the law did not apply because “U.S. operations do not
involve sustained fighting or active exchanges of fire with hostile forces, nor
do they involve U.S. ground troops.” Though that prompted bipartisan backlash
at the time, some lawmakers anticipate that the Trump administration could make
a similar argument about Iran.
During
his first term, Mr. Trump similarly balked at the law in 2019 when he vetoed a
bipartisan resolution both chambers had passed that sought to end American
military involvement in Saudi Arabia’s civil war in Yemen. He argued then that
the measure was an “unnecessary, dangerous attempt to weaken my constitutional
authorities.”
Still,
ignoring the deadline could pose a political problem for the G.O.P., which so
far has given the administration broad latitude to carry out the war without
congressional involvement, including any formal oversight.
“Many
Republicans are on record having set the 60-day mark as somehow legally
important,” said Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut, who has been among the
Democrats offering resolutions aimed at limiting the president’s ability to
continue the war without congressional authorization. “So I do think it will be
harder for Republicans to continue to look the other way once we are out of the
60 days.”
Robert
Jimison covers Congress for The Times, with a focus on defense issues and
foreign policy.


Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário