A group of US Senate Democrats led by Colorado Senator John Hickenlooper has introduced a joint resolution seeking to end what they describe as unauthorised US military involvement against Iran, escalating a congressional challenge to President Donald Trump’s handling of the conflict.The measure, designated SJRes. 211, invokes Congress’s constitutional authority over war powers and directs the removal of US armed forces from “hostilities within or against the Islamic Republic of Iran that have not been authorised by Congress”, according to the resolution.Hickenlooper, announcing the move on Friday, criticised the costs of the conflict and accused the Trump administration of bypassing Congress.“We just introduced a resolution to put a stop to President Trump‘s illegal war with Iran,” Hickenlooper said in a post on X. “American lives have been lost. Gas and fertiliser prices have skyrocketed. Our military stockpiles have been drained. End this war. NOW.”The resolution was introduced in the Senate, read twice and referred to the relevant committee for further consideration, according to information released by Hickenlooper’s office.The Colorado senator said the war had resulted in American casualties, higher costs and depleted military stockpiles, and argued that Congress needed to intervene. His office said Hickenlooper had voted 13 times to end the Iran war and had repeatedly criticised the administration for what he described as an effort to sidestep congressional authority.
Democrats seek greater congressional control over Iran conflict
The resolution has been backed by several Democratic senators, including Tim Kaine of Virginia, Adam Schiff of California, Mark Kelly of Arizona, Chris Murphy of Connecticut, Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin, Jeff Merkley of Oregon, Andy Kim of New Jersey, Tammy Duckworth of Illinois and Chris Coons of Delaware, according to the announcement.The move comes amid growing debate in Washington over the extent of presidential authority to conduct military operations without explicit congressional authorisation.Hickenlooper’s office said a concurrent resolution on Iran war powers has already passed both chambers of Congress, with the Senate potentially taking up his legislation next month.The latest effort also comes as concerns have emerged within the US military over the limits of continued air operations. According to CNN, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Dan Caine has privately advised senior Trump administration officials to seek an “off-ramp” from the conflict.Caine has reportedly warned that further military escalation could backfire and that airpower alone may not be sufficient to achieve Trump’s stated objectives. His discussions have reportedly included senior members of the administration, including vice president JD Vance, secretary of state Marco Rubio and CIA director John Ratcliffe.As per CNN, one person familiar with the discussions described Caine’s approach as an effort to “protect the military”, while another source said, “Caine is looking for an off-ramp.”
Trump says conflict could end ‘pretty soon’
Trump, however, has continued to express confidence in the trajectory of the conflict. Speaking on Thursday, he said the confrontation with Iran could end “pretty soon” and suggested that Iran could not sustain the situation for much longer.Trump has also pointed to ongoing negotiations involving Iran and the Strait of Hormuz, a critical route for global oil shipments. He has said progress in the talks could help stabilise the waterway and eventually ease pressure on fuel prices.The conflict has already raised concerns about wider economic and regional consequences, particularly if disruption around the Strait of Hormuz persists.For the Trump administration, the central challenge remains achieving its stated objective of preventing Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon while avoiding the deployment of US ground forces and preventing the conflict from expanding.The Senate resolution now puts that question directly before Congress, with Democrats arguing that continued military action requires explicit legislative authorisation.
