War powers bill to keep Trump from further striking Iran fails in Senate


This recording was made using enhanced software.

Summary

Dead bill

Senators on Friday, June 27 narrowly defeated a Democratic resolution to keep the president from further attacks against Iran.

Narrow defeat

The measure was split on partisan lines with a few Republicans breaking to support it, but key Democratic defectors killed the bill.

Deja vu

Presidents from both sides of the aisle have unilaterally engaged in military actions without congressional approval.


Full story

A resolution that would have blocked President Donald Trump from further military intervention in Iran narrowly failed Friday evening in the U.S. Senate. Led by Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., Senate Joint Resolution 59 asserted the War Powers Act of 1973 requires Trump to first obtain permission from Congress before any further military action against Iran. 

QR code for SAN app download

Download the SAN app today to stay up-to-date with Unbiased. Straight Facts™.

Point phone camera here

Kaine told lawmakers from the Senate floor that his career “obsession” in the Senate has been keeping the United States out of unnecessary wars.

“I do know that, even today, the president said that he would certainly bomb Iran again,” Kaine said. “I’m hoping that the members of this body will stand up for the Constitution, will stand up for the proposition that war is too big to be decided by one person.”

Several Democrats, as well as independent Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, spoke up in favor of the measure. 

“War has awful and unintended consequences,” Sanders said. “It should only be considered as a last resort.” 

A couple of Republicans supported the resolution, giving the GOP its narrow majority.

Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., gave a brief history lesson on how the Founding Fathers, despite their political differences, largely agreed that the power to send the country to war should rest in the collective hands of Congress, and how previous administrations had taken unilateral action at the expense of American lives.

“Our own country sadly experienced this during Vietnam. The needless tragedy of that war, in which 58,000 Americans paid the ultimate sacrifice, led Congress to pass the War Powers Resolution we debate today,” said Paul. “Congress intended to ensure a president would never again unilaterally plunge the American people into war without the people’s representatives in Congress debating the issue.”

Sen. John Fetterman, D-Penn., and Republican Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, two lawmakers with reputations for bucking their parties, proved to be two of the decisive votes against Kaine’s bill.

“I’m going to vote ‘no’ on that simply because I would never want to restrict any future president, Republican or Democrat, to do this kind of military exercise that was very successful,” Fetterman, a staunch ally of Israel, told reporters at the Capitol on Thursday.

Collins said in a statement on June 27 that she could not support the resolution when threats of nuclear proliferation are at stake.

“I supported the President’s targeted strike on Iran’s pursuit of nuclear capabilities because a nuclear-armed Iran would pose an unacceptable threat to America and our allies. I also applaud the current ceasefire,” Collins said. “Given this backdrop, it is the wrong time to consider this resolution and to risk inadvertently sending a message to Iran that the President cannot swiftly defend Americans at home and abroad.”

The final vote tally was 53-47, short of the 51 votes necessary to keep it alive.

Iran strikes

After a surprise attack from Israel on June 13 led to days of bombings between it and Iran, Trump on June 21 deployed B-2 bombers from a base in Missouri to strike three Iranian nuclear facilities. The bombers left Iranian airspace by the time the president announced the strike. 

Initial intelligence reporting that leaked indicated that the Massive Ordnance Penetrator bombs, known as “bunker busters,” didn’t reach the Fordo nuclear facility that’s buried deep underground near Tehran. Further intelligence reports indicated “extensive damage” corroborated by Iranian officials, but Trump’s comments about the “obliteration” of the Iranian nuclear program remain unconfirmed outside of the administration.

What is the War Powers Act? 

The War Powers Resolution of 1973 aims to split responsibility for military action between the president and Congress. 

One provision requires the president to submit a letter to congressional leaders within 48 hours of a military action. It needs to explain the scope and reasoning behind the strike. 

Trump sent the letter on June 23 to House Speaker Mike Johnson and Senate President Pro Tempore Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa.

“The strike was taken to advance vital United States national interests, and in collective self-defense of our ally, Israel, by eliminating Iran’s nuclear program,” Trump said, noting that the strike was limited in scope and purpose.

Trump sent a similar letter to Congress regarding his strikes on Houthi rebels in March. 

Other presidents’ unilateral actions

Unilateral strikes like Trump’s bombing order extend across the political aisle. Former President Barack Obama in 2011 approved airstrikes against Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi. Obama’s administration pushed NATO for a resolution authorizing military intervention in Libya before the strikes began that March. Gaddafi was pushing back against an uprising that was part of the “Arab Spring” movement that swept across the Middle East. 

Former President Bill Clinton in 1999 conducted a series of bombing runs in Yugoslavia without congressional approval.

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Why this story matters

The Senate's narrow rejection of a resolution to restrict presidential authority over military actions against Iran highlights ongoing debates about war powers, the balance of governmental authority, and constitutional checks in the context of rising U.S.–Iran tensions.

War powers and constitutional authority

Debates over the War Powers Act and the separation of military decision-making responsibilities between Congress and the executive branch reflect longstanding constitutional questions about who has the authority to commit the nation to armed conflict.

U.S.–Iran military conflict

Recent U.S. military strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities, following escalations with Israel, underscore the potential for further conflict and the implications for international security and regional stability.

Bipartisan perspectives, dissent

The Senate vote, with members from both parties split in their support and opposition, illustrates the complexities of legislative checks on executive military action and the difficulty in achieving consensus on foreign policy decisions.

Get the big picture

Synthesized coverage insights across 26 media outlets

Community reaction

Community responses cited include antiwar advocates and groups supporting Kaine’s resolution, emphasizing the public’s wariness of new military engagement in the Middle East. Both left and center sources mention statements by advocacy organizations warning against unauthorized conflicts and highlight sentiments from U.S. lawmakers reflecting public fatigue over "forever wars."

Context corner

The push for Congressional approval for military action relates to the War Powers Resolution of 1973, created to check presidential power following the Vietnam War. Historically, U.S. presidents have often engaged in overseas military operations under broad interpretations of their commander-in-chief authority, which has sparked ongoing debates about the balance of war powers in U.S. governance.

Terms to know

War Powers Resolution: A 1973 law intended to check the president’s power to commit the U.S. to armed conflict without Congressional consent. AUMF (Authorization for Use of Military Force): Congressional acts granting the president authority to use military force under specific circumstances. Privileged Resolution: A legislative measure requiring expedited consideration in Congress.

Bias comparison

  • Media outlets on the left frame the Senate’s rejection of the Iran War Powers resolution as a dangerous failure to check what they portray as Trump’s "unhinged" and unilateral military overreach, emphasizing congressional responsibility and constitutional limits to restrain executive power.
  • Media outlets in the center maintain a more neutral, procedural tone but still acknowledge the constitutional basis for executive war powers and democratic debate.
  • Media outlets on the right laud the Senate for “shutting down” efforts to constrain Trump, portraying the strikes as necessary, constitutionally sound actions protecting U.S. interests, and dismissing the War Powers Act as an outdated “relic” that would “tie the president’s hands.”

Media landscape

Click on bars to see headlines

26 total sources

Key points from the Left

  • The Senate rejected a resolution from Senator Tim Kaine that aimed to limit President Trump's military actions against Iran, voting 53-47 against it.
  • The resolution would have required congressional approval for any military strikes on Iran, except in self-defense or imminent danger, as stated in the War Powers Act of 1973.

Report an issue with this summary

Key points from the Center

  • On June 27, 2025, the Senate voted 53-47 against a resolution to limit President Donald Trump's military actions against Iran following airstrikes on Iranian nuclear facilities.
  • Debate included Republican insistence that Trump acted within his commander-in-chief powers and Democratic arguments emphasizing the Constitution grants Congress war-declaring authority.

Report an issue with this summary

Key points from the Right

  • The Senate blocked a resolution to limit President Donald Trump's war powers against Iran in a 47-53 vote, mostly along party lines.
  • Democratic Senator Tim Kaine introduced the resolution to require Congressional approval for military action against Iran.

Report an issue with this summary

Powered by Ground News™