A split Senate votes against measure to constrain Trump’s authorities in Iran : NPR

A resolution to require President Trump to seek congressional approval for any further action in Iran failed to advance in the Senate, five days after the U.S. and Israel launched a military campaign against the Iranian regime.

The vote was 47-53, largely along party lines. If passed, the resolution would have blocked further U.S. military action in Iran without congressional approval under the 1973 War Powers Act. That legislation passed during the Vietnam War to give Congress a legal check on executive war authority. The 1973 act also requires the president to notify Congress within 48 hours of deploying U.S. forces into hostilities and to end the deployment within 60 days unless Congress authorizes or extends it.

The House is expected to vote on a similar measure on Thursday.

Democrats argue that Congress needs to reassert its authority to declare war and rein in President Trump’s ability to act unilaterally, with some senators calling the strikes illegal.

Maryland Sen. Chris Van Hollen, who serves on the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, is among the Democrats pushing for Congress to restrain Trump from further action.

“Trump is lying to the American people as he launches an illegal, regime-change war against Iran,” Van Hollen said in a statement released ahead of the vote. “This is endangering American lives and has already resulted in mass civilian casualties. This is not making us safer and only damages the U.S. and our interests.”

Republicans have overwhelmingly voiced support for the joint strikes that killed Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and targeted the country’s navy and ballistic missile capabilities. But questions remained about the scope and timeline of the operation after classified briefings with military and State Department leaders this week.

The vote came hours after Defense Sec. Pete Hegseth told reporters the U.S. and Israel are days away from controlling Iranian airspace. He also said the U.S. could “sustain this fight easily for as long as we need to” and “we’re just getting started.

Republicans largely united behind Iran campaign at this stage

While some conservatives – including influential commentators and current and former House members – have criticized the action in Iran as contrary to Trump’s “America First” pledges, Republican Senators ahead of Wednesday’s vote lauded the campaign against the Iranian regime. Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., was the lone Republican vote in support of the Senate resolution.

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., a longtime Iran hawk, said he has “never felt better about how this ends.”

“The goal is to make sure that when this is over, this regime cannot build ballistic missiles to hit America or terrorize the region. And when this conflict is over, they cannot continue to support Hezbollah, Hamas and the Houthis, the terrorist network, and they can never go back in the nuclear business,” Graham told reporters in the Capitol on Tuesday. “The demise of this regime is at hand, and the goal is to make sure they can never be a threat like they were before.”

Sen. Markwayne Mullin, R-Okla., echoed the praise on Tuesday saying “the president’s taken out a real regime that’s been threatening us for 47 years.”

Others, like Sen. Kevin Cramer, R-N.D., supported Trump’s decision to act without a formal vote from Congress. He told reporters the Constitution “gives the commander in chief a great deal of latitude and power with regard to kinetic action. And in my mind, he certainly hasn’t exceeded that or even close as of now.”

Speaking to reporters Tuesday after an all-senators briefing on the strike, Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-La., said he would not support a War Powers resolution because “you can’t be halfway pregnant.”

“We’re in there,” he said. “And by the way I thought they just made a good case why we are. And so, right now we’ve got to support the troops.”

But several Republicans suggested their assessments might be different if the U.S. were to put troops on the ground in the Middle East. Sen. Roger Wicker, chair of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said the administration officials would not rule that out as a possibility.

“I think that would be a case they’d have to make at that time,” Mullin said. “I support 100% eliminating this threat to never kill or injure another American like they have for 47 years. They’ve taken out thousands of Americans through injury and through death. And I have no desire to see that threat continue for one more day.”

Others said there was no indication that ground troop deployments were part of the administration’s plan. Sen. John Hoeven, R-S.D., left open the possibility that those plans could change. “I think you have to be careful to keep open options rather than speculate on those things and tell your adversaries what you are or are not going to do,” he said.

Sen. Kevin Cramer, R-N.D., said he would not support boots on the ground “today, but again, depending on what happens going forward, I’m not going to take any of my options off the table.”

“Every situation requires the intelligence of the moment,” Cramer said. “But certainly that wouldn’t be that would not be desirable.”

Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., acknowledged conservative critiques about the long-term plan for the region, and of the shifting explanations behind the decision to go to war. Those critiques sharpened after Sec. of State Marco Rubio told reporters that Israel’s plans to attack Iran played a role in the U.S. decision to strike first.

“They’re properly warning about being too quick to intervene in other countries, and I get that,” Kennedy said. “There’s no rule book here. I mean, I don’t want America to be the world’s policeman. I don’t want the zealots, the religious zealots in Iran to be the world’s policeman either. And if they get a nuclear weapon, they will be. Because they will use it.”

Democrats continue to push for Congress to step in

After Tuesday’s administration briefing, Sen. Andy Kim said that Trump “owns” the results of the conflict, including the death of six U.S. service members so far.

“He chose to start this war, and as a result, he chose to put these Americans in harm’s way,” Kim said. “The fact that Hegseth continuously says that they’re not going to rule out boots on the ground is just another reason why this approval was needed from Congress and that they could not and should not have been able to move along on their own.”

While the War Powers measure failed on the floor, Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., called on Democrats to maintain pressure on the administration.

“We shouldn’t be acting like this is business as usual,” Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., said Tuesday after the briefing. “We shouldn’t be proceeding to legislation, providing votes to proceed to legislation until they put an authorization for military force on the floor of the United States Senate. This is as serious as it gets. This is war and peace.”

Military funding could be the next opportunity for Congress to weigh in

Lawmakers could soon have another opportunity to assert the constitutional role of Congress. Rep. Tom Cole R-Okla., chair of the House Appropriations Committee, said the Defense Department is working on a request for a supplemental funding package. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said Wednesday she did not have any updates on potential asks for additional funding.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said he would not comment on a request that has not yet been made, but told reporters “the bottom line is that before you can feel satisfied about a supplemental — and I haven’t seen it — you have to know what the real goals are and what the end game is.”

Sen. Chris Coons, D-Del., said he expects the Pentagon to request supplemental funding and “will continue to support our troops and to make sure we are making all the investments we can to keep them and their families safe.”

“But we need an open hearing so that you and the American people can get questions answered about the failures in planning that led to some of the challenges, the losses and mistakes in this war so far,” he said. “So that we can get a clearer answer on how long this war will last and what its real objectives are, and so that we can get answers to the American people about how to get their loved ones out of harm’s way.”

Rep. Chip Roy, R-Tx., a member of the conservative House Freedom Caucus who is retiring at the end of this term, said he supports President Trump’s authority and decision to take action in Iran, but his support is dependent on “length of time and troops on the ground — there’s kind of a point at which that becomes necessary for congressional involvement.”

“I don’t view it through the lens of the War Powers Resolution…What I would do is say that when there is a request for additional resources and money that we’ll need to then take that all under advisement,” Roy said. Sen. Tim Kaine, who co-sponsored the War Powers resolution, said Tuesday the measure is “not a one and done,” and that Democrats are also considering other strategies to weigh in on conflict – including through the appropriations process.

This week’s votes, Kaine said, “will be the first effort of all Congress going on the record about this. But I can assure you it’s not going to be the last.”

NPR’s Luke Garrett and Scott Neuman contributed to this report.