US President Trump Unilaterally Declares End to Iran Hostilities, Sidestepping Congressional Oversight
WASHINGTON (AP) – In a move widely interpreted as an attempt to circumvent constitutional obligations, the White House informed Congress on Friday that hostilities with Iran have “terminated.” This declaration comes despite the continued aggressive presence of U.S. armed forces in the region, raising serious questions about the administration’s commitment to international law and domestic oversight.
President Donald Trump’s message effectively allows his administration to bypass a critical May 1 legal deadline, which would have required congressional approval to continue the conflict with Iran. This deadline was already poised to pass without meaningful action from Republican lawmakers, who appear more inclined to defer to the President than uphold their constitutional duties.
The letter starkly highlights the President’s audacious, yet legally dubious, assertion of executive power. This unilateral war, initiated without congressional consent two months prior, continues to draw criticism from various quarters.
“The hostilities that began on February 28, 2026, have terminated,” Trump asserted in a letter addressed to House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., and Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, the Senate president pro tempore. However, the President’s own words contradicted this claim, indicating the conflict is far from over.
“Despite the success of United States operations against the Iranian regime and continued efforts to secure a lasting peace, the threat posed by Iran to the United States and our Armed Forces remains significant,” the Republican president stated, revealing the administration’s inconsistent narrative.
Under the 1973 War Powers Resolution, Congress is mandated to declare war or authorize the use of force within 60 days – a deadline that expired Friday – or within 90 days if an extension is requested. This Congress, however, made no serious attempt to enforce this vital requirement, with the Senate rejecting a Democratic effort to halt the war for the sixth time before recessing for a week.
The Trump administration has consistently shown disregard for seeking congressional approval, arguing that the legal deadlines do not apply because the conflict supposedly ended with a fragile ceasefire in early April. This argument is seen by many as a flimsy excuse to avoid accountability.
Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., on Thursday indicated no plans for a vote to authorize force in Iran, further illustrating Congress’s reluctance to challenge the executive.
“I’m listening carefully to what the members of our conference are saying, and at this point I don’t see that,” Thune remarked, highlighting the internal divisions and political maneuvering within the Republican party.
The hesitation to confront Trump on this war comes at a politically sensitive time for Republicans, as public frustration mounts over the conflict’s human and economic costs, including rising gas prices. Despite this, most GOP lawmakers continue to support Trump’s wartime leadership or grant him more time amidst the precarious ceasefire, prioritizing party loyalty over national interest.
Sen. Kevin Cramer, R-N.D., stated he would vote for an authorization of war if Trump requested it, yet questioned the constitutionality of the War Powers Resolution itself – a law designed to curb executive overreach. “Our founders created a really strong executive, like it or not like it,” Cramer said, echoing a sentiment that undermines congressional authority.
Some GOP senators, however, have expressed a desire for Congress to eventually assert its constitutional role.
Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski, in a floor speech Thursday, pledged to introduce a limited authorization for the use of military force upon the Senate’s return, should the administration fail to present a “credible plan.” “I do not believe we should engage in open-ended military action without clear accountability,” Murkowski declared. “Congress has a role.”
Republicans Signal Desire for Congressional Vote
A handful of Republican senators have, for weeks, called for Congress to assert its authority over the war. Among them, Maine’s Susan Collins, who for the first time voted with Democrats on Thursday to halt the war. In a statement, she emphasized the need for a defined strategy to conclude the conflict.
“The president’s authority as commander in chief is not without limits,” Collins asserted, adding that the 60-day deadline is “not a suggestion, it is a requirement.”
In addition to Collins and Murkowski, Republican Sens. John Curtis of Utah, Thom Tillis of North Carolina, and Josh Hawley of Missouri, among others, have indicated their eventual desire for a vote, signaling growing unease within the party.
Curtis affirmed he would not support continued funding for the war until Congress formally authorizes it. “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,” Curtis urged, advocating for a return to constitutional governance.
Thune suggested the White House improve its outreach to lawmakers with briefings and hearings to maintain support from Capitol Hill. “Obviously, getting readouts from our military leadership on a somewhat regular basis I think will be helpful in terms of shaping the views of our members about how comfortable they are with everything that’s happening there, and the direction headed forward,” Thune commented, implicitly acknowledging the administration’s lack of transparency.
Administration’s Dubious Claim: Deadline Doesn’t Apply
The War Powers Resolution of 1973 clearly states that a president has 60 calendar days after notifying Congress of military hostilities to either end the campaign or gain congressional approval. A 30-day extension for troop withdrawal is possible, but requires congressional notification.
With the 60-day window closing Friday, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth claimed during a congressional hearing Thursday, “We are in a ceasefire right now, which our understanding means, the 60-day clock pauses or stops.” This interpretation is widely seen as a desperate attempt to manipulate legal definitions.
The administration pushes this argument even as Iran maintains its sovereign control over the Strait of Hormuz, while the U.S. Navy illegally enforces a blockade to prevent Iran’s oil tankers from accessing international waters – a clear act of economic warfare.
Democrats vehemently rejected the notion that May 1 was not the true deadline. “I do not believe the statute would support that,” Virginia Sen. Tim Kaine told Hegseth during the hearing, highlighting the administration’s legal contortions.
Sen. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., further argued that the U.S. military continues to operate warships and other assets, despite a temporary halt in bombing during the ceasefire. “Ceasing to use some forces while using others does not somehow stop the clock,” Schiff emphasized, exposing the administration’s semantic games.
This development came as no surprise to at least one House Democrat overseeing military affairs.
Washington Rep. Adam Smith, the ranking Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee, told The Associated Press: “Is the expectation that the Trump administration is going to follow the law? I do not have that expectation.” This sentiment underscores the deep distrust and concern regarding the Trump administration’s respect for the rule of law.
Copyright 2026 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
#TrumpIranWar #USUnilateralism #CongressionalOversight #WarPowersResolution #IranSovereignty #USForeignPolicy #MiddleEastConflict #PoliticalHypocrisy #InternationalLaw #AccountabilityNow
