WASHINGTON — Democrats on Capitol Hill are forging ahead with efforts to curb President Donald Trump’s ability to take further military action against Iran, moving amid a shaky ceasefire to build support for a measure that could come to a Senate vote as soon as the end of the week.
Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., the chief sponsor of a resolution that would require congressional approval before the U.S. military engages in further hostilities against Iran, proposed to narrow his measure to allay concerns that it could interfere with America’s support for Israel.
Kaine and two other Democratic backers of the resolution, Sens. Adam Schiff of California and Andy Kim of New Jersey, introduced language Tuesday specifying that the curb would only apply to offensive action, not for the U.S.’ continuing support for Israel “in taking defensive measures” against Iran or its proxies.
The amendment also would make explicit that congressional authorization would not be needed to defend against attacks on U.S. personnel or facilities abroad or for the United States to continue sharing intelligence with allies like Israel in response to Iranian threats.
Schiff said in a statement that the changes were meant to clarify that the resolution would “not limit our ability to protect our troops or aid Israel in its own defense, should Iran continue to engage in attacks against us and our allies.”
The resolution stands little chance of approval. With Republicans holding majorities in both chambers of Congress, it is unlikely that any measure restricting Trump’s military authority will succeed. But by putting it forward, Kaine and other lawmakers who back such measures have reinvigorated a long-dormant debate over Congress’ role in matters of war.
The changes may make Kaine’s measure more palatable for some Democrats who are concerned that Trump did not seek Congress’ approval before authorizing the bombings yet are reluctant to embrace any legislation that could tie the president’s hands in backing Israel.
Democrats have been deeply divided over backing Israel, with some in the party strongly supportive but many on the left deeply opposed to doing so. But since the strike, they have sought to find common ground in their outrage that Trump neither sought authorization nor consulted with Congress before moving against Iran, and the modifications appeared designed to foster as much unity as possible.
On Tuesday, Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., the minority leader, excoriated the Trump administration for canceling a classified briefing with lawmakers that had been scheduled to brief them on the strike.
“What is the administration so afraid of?” Schumer said in a statement. “Why won’t they engage with Congress on the critical details: the results of the recent strike, the scope and trajectory of this conflict, the administration’s long-term strategy to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons, and the potential risks facing American citizens and our service members?”
In the House, three top national security Democrats, Reps. Jim Himes, Gregory Meeks and Adam Smith, introduced a separate War Powers Resolution late Monday that also seeks to invoke congressional authority over the use of U.S. forces in the Middle East.
That measure also includes language that would reaffirm self-defense priorities and make clear that their aim is not to limit executive authority when responding to attacks on either U.S. interests or American allies, including Israel.
“The War Powers Resolution we’ve introduced today orders the removal of U.S. Armed Forces from hostilities against Iran, while allowing U.S. forces to carry out defensive operations to defend the United States and its partners and allies from imminent attack, including those defending Israel,” the three — the senior Democrats on the Intelligence, Foreign Affairs and Armed Services committees — said in a joint statement.
Leading Republicans, and even some anti-interventionist members of the party, have refused to consider limiting Trump’s war-making authority, saying he exercised his presidential power appropriately in striking Iran. Speaker Mike Johnson said Tuesday that he believed the War Powers Act, the 1973 law that requires congressional authorization for the use of military force, is unconstitutional.
And some Democrats are equally opposed.
“I don’t want any mission creep,” said Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., a vocal supporter of Israel who has celebrated the Iran strike. He said congressional intervention was not needed until a “full-on war” started and said involving lawmakers would have hampered the operation against Iran.
A parallel bipartisan effort is also underway in the House led by Reps. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., and Ro Khanna, D-Calif. But late Monday, after Iran launched missiles at the largest U.S. military base in the Middle East and Trump claimed on social media that Israel and Iran had agreed to a ceasefire, its Republican sponsor suggested he might not push for a vote.
“If a ceasefire holds, the resolution becomes a moot point,” Massie told reporters Monday. “I wouldn’t need to bring it to the floor.”
Khanna said he and Massie were “taking a wait-and-see approach about whether a vote will be needed now on our War Powers Resolution.”
This article originally appeared in The New York Times.
© 2025 The New York Times Company