The Trump administration has argued that the war with Iran is already over because of the ceasefire that began in early April, an explanation that would allow the White House to avoid the need to seek Congressional approval.
The statement furthers an argument made by US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth during his Senate testimony earlier Thursday, when he said the ceasefire effectively stopped the war.
Under that rationale, the administration has not met the requirement mandated by the 1973 law to seek formal authorization from Congress to take military action that extends beyond 60 days.
A senior administration official, who did not want to be named to discuss the position of the administration, said that with the purpose of that law, “the conflicts that started on Saturday, February 28 are over.”
The official said that the American and Iranian forces had been exchanging weapons since the two-week ceasefire that began on April 7.
While the ceasefire has been extended, Iran continues its grip on the Strait of Hormuz, and the US Navy maintains a blockade to prevent Iranian oil tankers from leaving the sea.
Under the War Powers Resolution, a law that sought to curtail the president's military powers, US President Donald Trump had until Friday to ask congress for approval or stop fighting.
Get the latest country news
Get the best Canadian news delivered to your inbox as it happens so you never miss a trending story.
The law also allows the administration to extend that deadline by 30 days.
Democrats have pushed the administration to formally authorize war on Iran, and the 60-day mark could be a major turning point for Republican lawmakers who support short-term action against Tehran but insist on congressional approval for something longer.
“That deadline is not a suggestion; it is a requirement,” said Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, voted Thursday in favor of a measure that would end the military attack on Iran since Congress did not give it its approval.
He added that “any military action against Iran must have a clear mission, achievable goals, and a defined strategy to end the conflict.”
Richard Goldberg, who served as director of countering Iran's weapons of mass destruction for the National Security Council during Trump's first term, said he recommended administration officials immediately transition to the new operation, which he suggested could be called “Epic Passage,” a sequel to Operation Epic Fury.
He said that the new campaign, “would be a defensive policy focused on reopening the strait while reserving the right of offensive action to support the restoration of freedom of navigation.”
“That to me solves everything,” added Goldberg, now a senior adviser at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, a Washington think tank.
During testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee on Thursday, Hegseth said it was the administration's “understanding” that the 60-day clock was ticking while the two countries ended hostilities. Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., who had asked Hegseth about the timeline, later told reporters that the defense secretary “advanced a new argument that I've never heard before” and that “there is no official support.”
Katherine Yon Ebright, an adviser to the Brennan Center's Liberty and National Security Program and an expert on military power, said the interpretation would be a “major expansion of previous gamesmanship” related to the 1973 law.
“To be very clear and specific, there is nothing in the text or construction of the War Powers Resolution that suggests the 60-day clock can be paused or terminated,” he said.
Some presidents have argued that the military action they have taken was not strong enough or short-lived to qualify under the War Powers Resolution.
But Trump's war on Iran certainly won't be such a case, Ebright said, adding that lawmakers need to push back against the administration on that kind of argument.
© 2026 The Canadian Press
