Legal Experts Challenge Trump's Assertion That Iran 'War' Was Terminated and War Powers Clock Paused

President Donald Trump told Congress in a Friday letter that the Iran war had been "terminated," a declaration that arrived as the 60-day statutory deadline under the War Powers Resolution passed without congressional authorization. In nearly identical letters to House Speaker Mike Johnson and Senate leaders, Trump wrote that the hostilities that began on February 28, 2026, had ended, noting that he had ordered a two-week ceasefire on April 7 that had since been extended and that there had been no exchange of fire between U.S. and Iranian forces since that date. The underlying campaign, launched as Operation Epic Fury alongside Israel, began with strikes on February 28; the administration filed its war powers notification with Congress on March 2, starting the 60-day clock from then.
The position built on remarks by Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, who told the Senate Armed Services Committee on Thursday that "the 60-day clock pauses or stops" during a ceasefire. Trump echoed that reasoning and went further, telling reporters he viewed seeking congressional authorization as "unconstitutional" and asserting — inaccurately — that prior presidents had not done so either. In his letter, the president invoked his constitutional authority as commander in chief and chief executive, and warned that despite what he called the success of U.S. operations, the threat Iran posed to American forces "remains significant," leaving more than 50,000 service members deployed across the Middle East at risk.
Opponents of the administration's position found those arguments unpersuasive. Curtis Bradley, a University of Chicago law professor and scholar of constitutional war powers, told the Daily Caller News Foundation that the central question was whether the United States was still using its armed forces in connection with the conflict. "The fact that the United States has paused its bombing does not mean that the conflict has ended," Bradley said, adding that he was unaware of any precedent for the claim that a temporary ceasefire pauses the War Powers Resolution clock. He noted that earlier administrations had advanced kindred arguments, pointing to the Obama administration's contention during the 2011 Libya campaign that sustained bombing did not amount to "hostilities" under the law. Critics also stressed that active military pressure on Iran had not, in fact, stopped: the U.S. Navy was enforcing a blockade of Iranian ports — a step widely regarded as an act of war — even as Hegseth publicly warned that strikes could resume "at the push of a button" against Iran's energy infrastructure.
Tess Bridgeman, a former National Security Council lawyer and co-editor-in-chief of Just Security, told the DCNF the White House interpretation is "not credible," and that the United States "remains engaged in military operations" that she says "clearly constitute 'hostilities' even under the executive branch's elastic definition." Bridgeman pointed to legislative history suggesting Congress meant a broad definition of "hostilities," and said the current circumstances were "not a close call" because of ongoing risks to American forces.
Democratic Senator Tim Kaine of Virginia, speaking during the same hearing, expressed concern about the administration's approach, saying, "We have serious constitutional concerns, and we don't want to layer them with additional statutory concerns." Kaine had been among the lawmakers repeatedly pressing for a vote to constrain the campaign — the Senate had rejected Democratic attempts to halt the war on multiple occasions — but congressional leaders showed little appetite for forcing the issue. Senate Majority Leader John Thune said he did not plan to hold a vote to authorize force or otherwise weigh in, and Congress left Washington for a week shortly before the deadline lapsed. At the same time, a growing number of Republicans signaled unease with the open-ended timeline Trump had once suggested would last only weeks, with some exploring legislation to authorize force against Iran outright — a move that would sidestep the War Powers debate altogether.
The War Powers Resolution, enacted by Congress in 1973 over President Richard Nixon's veto, requires presidents to notify Congress within 48 hours of introducing U.S. forces into hostilities and generally calls for withdrawal within 60 days unless Congress authorizes continued action, with a possible 30-day extension. Notably, Trump's letter did not invoke that extension provision. The statute does not explicitly address whether a temporary pause in hostilities or a ceasefire resets that 60-day window, leaving room for competing legal interpretations.
The Daily Caller News Foundation asked the Department of War whether it considers a ceasefire to reset the War Powers clock and requested the legal basis for that interpretation. The Department referred inquiries to the White House, which pointed reporters back to the administration's newly released letter to Congress. The dispute underscores a broader constitutional and political fight over the limits of executive war-making authority and the role of Congress in authorizing extended military engagements, with potential implications for oversight of U.S. operations in and around Iran.