Trump Administration Claims Iran War Ended Early to Dodge Congressional Approval

The Trump administration is pushing a dubious legal argument to avoid seeking congressional approval for its military actions against Iran. Claiming the conflict has “terminated” because of a ceasefire that started in early April, officials say the 60-day clock under the War Powers Resolution no longer applies. This interpretation, laid out by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth during Senate testimony, would let the White House continue operations without formal congressional consent.

A senior administration official told the Associated Press that “hostilities that began on Saturday, Feb. 28 have terminated,” pointing to the ceasefire as a pause in fighting. Yet despite this claim, Iran continues to exert control over the Strait of Hormuz, while the U.S. Navy maintains a blockade to prevent Iranian oil tankers from leaving port. The military standoff is very much ongoing.

The War Powers Resolution, enacted in 1973 to check presidential war-making powers, requires the president to get congressional authorization for military action lasting more than 60 days. That deadline fell on Friday, and Democrats have been pressing the administration to comply. Even some Republicans, like Sen. Susan Collins, have insisted that any further military action against Iran must come with clear goals and congressional approval.

Legal experts call the administration’s ceasefire argument a “novel” and legally unsupported maneuver. Katherine Yon Ebright, counsel at the Brennan Center for Justice, called it a “sizeable extension of previous legal gamesmanship,” emphasizing that the War Powers Resolution’s 60-day clock cannot simply be paused or reset by a ceasefire.

This is not the first time presidents have tried to evade the War Powers Resolution by downplaying the intensity or duration of military actions. But the Trump administration’s ongoing conflict with Iran, marked by blockades and military posturing, clearly qualifies as sustained hostilities requiring oversight.

Former National Security Council official Richard Goldberg suggested the administration could rebrand the operation as a new “self-defense” mission to skirt the legal requirements, but critics say this is just another attempt to dodge accountability.

Congressional pushback is mounting as lawmakers warn that allowing the president to unilaterally extend military conflict without oversight sets a dangerous precedent. The Trump administration’s attempt to rewrite the rules on war powers underscores its broader pattern of executive overreach and disregard for democratic checks and balances.