Thu, 4 Jun 2026 · LIVE
Updated Jun 4, 2026 · 05:06
World News Updated Jun 4, 2026

US House Passes Resolution to Limit Trump's Iran War Powers

The US House of Representatives passed a Democratic-led resolution to limit President Trump's military authority regarding Iran. The 215-208 vote saw four Republicans cross party lines to support the measure. The resolution, introduced by Democrat Gregory Meeks, is a concurrent resolution that does not require the president's signature and lacks force of law. Speaker Mike Johnson opposed the measure, arguing it would weaken the administration's negotiation position.

Trump faces jolt as US House passes resolution seeking to end Iran war

Washington, DC, June 4

The US House of Representatives has passed a Democratic-led resolution aimed at halting the conflict with Iran until the legislature formally sanctions military action.

The lower chamber approved the resolution on Wednesday to curb President Donald Trump's military authority regarding Iran, delivering a sharp rebuke to the administration's management of the hostilities.

CNN reported that the narrow 215-208 vote succeeded after Republican Representatives Thomas Massie, Brian Fitzpatrick, Tom Barrett, and Warren Davidson crossed party lines to back the measure.

This shift follows repeated efforts by Democrats to restrict Trump's war powers across both congressional chambers, a movement that has increasingly garnered Republican backing.

The adoption of the War Powers Resolution underscores mounting friction within the legislature over the administration's policies.

Recently, Senate Republicans rebelled against a contentious USD 1.8 billion "anti-weaponisation" fund favoured by the president, citing anxieties that it could facilitate payouts to supporters involved in the January 6, 2021, attack on the US Capitol.

Furthermore, Senate Republicans formally struck down funding intended for Trump's ballroom security on Wednesday during immigration package negotiations, following a determination by the chamber's parliamentarian that it breached spending regulations.

The legislative measure, categorised as a concurrent resolution, requires approval from both chambers of Congress but does not get sent to the president for signature.

CNN noted that concurrent resolutions lack the force of law under standard congressional rules.

The legislation was introduced by New York Democrat Gregory Meeks, the ranking member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

"I am thrilled that we've had the opportunity to have some members from the Republican side stand up. I'm really thrilled and proud of my Democratic colleagues, because every Democrat, every single one voted for this," Meeks told reporters after the proceedings.

He added, "We're going to continue to do our constitutional responsibilities, that's what we're doing. We're going to continue and be a check and a balance when the administration doesn't follow the Constitution."

The floor vote was originally scheduled for May 21 but was abruptly halted by Republican leadership when high absences threatened an immediate defeat.

CNN previously reported Meeks' assertions that House Speaker Mike Johnson was intentionally delaying the ballot.

"A lot of my Republican colleagues are feeling the pressure back home when they're looking at the cost of food, the cost of gas," Meeks previously stated to CNN, adding that Johnson "is feeling heat. He's trying to cover for the president. ... But I think the time of him being able to cover for the president is rapidly ending."

Prior to Wednesday's session, Speaker Johnson defended the decision of several Republican lawmakers to oppose the limits on presidential authority, warning that the restrictions could negatively impact diplomatic talks.

"I think it is a very dangerous prospect to take away from the administration and the commander-in-chief right now the ability to negotiate. That's what this does. It, it weakens us, our position, and our leverage in negotiation on the peace in that situation. 'Operation Epic Fury' is concluded," Johnson told CNN on Wednesday.

Johnson maintained that the administration's military targets within Iran were "well defined" and "achieved", despite ongoing demands from various lawmakers for comprehensive operational briefings.

"The president is now in the process of, of concluding a peace agreement, and we have to allow him the latitude to do that, and I think a war powers resolution right now is very untimely, and a very, very negative, and dangerous thing for the country," he said to CNN.

Meanwhile, a joint statutory probe into the military campaign has been initiated by inspectors general from the Pentagon, the State Department, and USAID.

The watchdogs issued a statement on Wednesday noting their legal obligation to investigate any overseas deployment exceeding 60 days.

This intervention indicates that oversight authorities view the conflict as having officially crossed the 60-day threshold since its initiation on February 28.

Under the War Powers Act, a president cannot sustain armed forces in active combat beyond 60 days without legislative consent.

The White House did not secure congressional authorisation for its military intervention, codenamed Operation Epic Fury.

Commenting on the statutory timeline last month, US Secretary of War Pete Hegseth stated that it was his understanding that the 60-day restriction on the conflict "reset" when President Donald Trump declared a ceasefire in April.

— ANI

Reader Comments

Priya S

Given India's close strategic ties with both US and Iran, this internal US tussle is worth monitoring. Our energy security and diaspora in Gulf could be affected if things escalate further. But it's good to see some checks on executive power, even in a superpower.

Michael C

As a US citizen, this makes me proud. Congress is finally remembering its constitutional duty to check the president. But it's frustrating that it took a controversial military operation and bipartisan defections to get here. The War Powers Act exists for a reason.

Rajesh Q

Yaar, this is classic American politics. Democrats blocking Trump, Republicans playing both sides. Meanwhile, the common people in Iran and the Middle East suffer. India should stay neutral and focus on our own border issues with China. 😒

Amanda J

I appreciate the rare bipartisan moment, but this resolution doesn't have binding legal force. It's symbolic at best. The real question is whether oversight investigations will actually hold anyone accountable for the 60+ day campaign without authorization.

Sneha F

As someone from Kerala with family in Gulf countries, this conflict's impact is personal. Oil prices, remittances, everything gets affected. But I'm glad the US Congress is finally exercising some oversight. India should learn from this and strengthen our own parliamentary checks on military action.

Vik

We welcome thoughtful discussions from our readers. Please keep comments respectful and on-topic.

Reader Voices

Leave a comment

Be kind. Add to the conversation. 0/50
Thank you — your comment has been submitted.
JS blocked