As the 60-Day Deadline Approaches, Republicans Are Confronted with a Crucial Test on the Iran War

(SeaPRwire) –   For the past six weeks, congressional Republicans have predominantly supported President Donald Trump’s initiation and escalation of a war in Iran, despite it occurring without their formal consent. However, this backing is poised for a significant challenge as the conflict approaches its 60th day, bringing Congress’s constitutional war-declaring power face-to-face with a legal deadline that may be unavoidable for Trump.

The War Powers Act of 1973 mandates that presidents end military actions after 60 days unless Congress has declared war or passed an authorization for the use of military force. A sole 30-day extension is permitted, but only if the president provides Congress with a written certification that extra time is essential for the safe withdrawal of American troops. To date, no such authorization related to Iran has been approved by Congress.

“The law requires us to either authorize ongoing operations or halt them,” Rep. Don Bacon, a Republican from Nebraska, informed TIME. “Without approval, they are legally obligated to cease operations.”

The U.S. military campaign started on February 28 and will hit the 60-day point on April 29. However, because Trump formally notified Congress of the strikes on March 2, which started the 60-day clock, he has until May 1 to obtain congressional approval to continue. Many legislators from both parties view May 1 as a critical legal juncture and a moment of accountability for Congress, forcing a choice between ending the war or granting it indefinite approval.

This impending deadline is becoming a pivotal moment for the Republican Party, which has generally endorsed Trump’s hardline stance on Iran but is growing more anxious about the possibility of a limitless war. As lawmakers came back from a two-week recess, several Republicans indicated to TIME that they would set a firm boundary at the 60-day mark, although opinions differed on the subsequent course of action.

“It’s the law,” Republican Sen. James Lankford of Oklahoma told TIME when questioned if Congress should authorize the war beyond that point. “They should.”

The White House did not reply to a request for comment on whether Trump intends to seek congressional authorization should the war continue past the 60-day period. Trump has occasionally refrained from using the term “war,” instead calling the Iran conflict a “military operation” or an “incursion,” and has indicated he may not need to seek authorization from Congress.

However, nearly all Democrats and a significant number of Republicans consider the 60-day deadline non-negotiable, meaning they anticipate Trump will make a formal request to Congress for authorization.

Democrats see the deadline as a point where Republicans can no longer evade questions about Congress’s supervisory role in the war. Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia, a leader in Democratic efforts to pass War Powers resolutions to terminate the Iran War, told TIME that Senate Democrats plan to force more such votes around the deadline, anticipating that Republican reasoning will change as the law’s demands become urgent rather than theoretical. “Some are suggesting that this is a watershed moment for them and I hope that that’s true,” Kaine said regarding the GOP.

Republican Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina was clear that U.S. operations must not proceed without authorization. “I think after 60 days,” he told TIME, “the War Powers Resolution states that you either present an exit plan that makes an AUMF [Authorization for Use of Military Force] unnecessary, or you intend to remain for a long time, which means an AUMF is required.”

Tillis further stated that his vote would be contingent on the details the administration provides Congress about future plans, which he said need to be more comprehensive than they have been. “It all depends on the information that gets conveyed to us about the strategic objectives, the timing, all that stuff needs to come before us,” Tillis said. “I’ve even heard some of the House chairs haven’t heard that information.”

Bacon, a former Air Force general, said he would back authorization if the President presented a compelling argument: “He should come in and request approval from Congress to finish the job. He should specify what that means.”

Other lawmakers stressed that Trump’s own initially stated timeline should determine the next moves. “The President said he wanted it to last weeks, not months, and he should stick to that goal,” Republican Sen. Jon Husted of Ohio told TIME.

Yet many Republicans are more hesitant to set strict limitations. Sen. Cynthia Lummis of Wyoming told TIME she is willing to let the conflict continue beyond 60 days without congressional authorization, expressing concerns about compromising military strategy. “I want to let it play out,” she said, noting that forcing the President to publicly outline his plans could provide too much information to Iran. Nevertheless, she conceded that Congress needs to be more thoroughly briefed.

This conflict arises as Congress reconvenes from a two-week recess, having missed the most unstable initial period of the war. During their absence, Trump has vacillated between intensifying rhetoric—once threatening to annihilate a “whole civilization”—and cautious attempts to negotiate a ceasefire, including a delicate diplomatic initiative via intermediaries.

The rapidly changing situation has left legislators trying to keep up with a conflict that is developing on both military and political fronts.

The War Powers Resolution, enacted over President Richard Nixon’s veto following the Vietnam War, was created to avert exactly this type of extended military action without congressional approval. Although presidents from both parties have challenged its constitutionality—and Congress has never successfully enforced a withdrawal using its rules—the law is a key focal point as the deadline approaches.

The impending clash over congressional authority is likely to extend into an equally contentious debate about war funding. With estimates indicating the conflict has already cost close to $30 billion, the Administration is anticipated to request an additional $80 to $100 billion in a supplemental funding bill.

This request would essentially compel lawmakers to decide whether to fund a military operation they have not officially authorized—a situation already increasing scrutiny from Republicans like Bacon, who said the White House must provide a clearer justification for its cost projections, even as he showed willingness to approve more funds to restock depleted weapon supplies. “They’ve got to tell us how they got their number,” he told TIME. “$200 billion was unrealistic. That said, we got to refill our coffers. All those cruise missiles we launched, we got to replace them.”