Winds shift in support of resolution to end Trump’s war with Iran

The House effort to end the Iran war is gaining steam.

A month ago, the lower chamber defeated a bipartisan resolution forcing President Trump to terminate military operations against Tehran until the administration can win congressional approval.

Since then, however, top administration officials have struggled to articulate an endgame; the price of gas has jumped above $4 per gallon; and Trump’s talk of boots on the ground has spooked more lawmakers, many of whom fear another protracted conflict in the Middle East.

The combination has caused some of the Democrats who opposed the first war powers resolution to change their tune heading into the second. And Democratic leaders say the next measure that comes to the floor will have the support to pass — a vote they want to compel soon after Congress returns to Washington from the long spring recess.

“When we present something on the floor, it’s our determination to win,” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) told reporters before the break. “We need to end this. The House needs to act.”

Indeed, several supporters of the effort to end the Iran conflict said Democrats could have passed a war powers resolution before the recess, but attendance problems prevented them from bringing it to the floor.

“There weren’t enough Democrats to pass it on the f‑‑‑ing floor,” one frustrated lawmaker said as Congress was leaving Washington last week. “I think we’re confident that we can get everybody this time. It’d be nice if we could actually pass it. But we can’t pass it with Democrats missing, and that’s why we didn’t bring it up this week.”

Leading the charge is Rep. Greg Meeks (N.Y.), the senior Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, who is crafting a war powers resolution designed to reaffirm Congress’s constitutional authority “to declare war.” He’s actively lobbying lawmakers in both parties and says he won’t force a vote until it has the backing to pass.

“When you see that I am going to utilize my privileged resolution, it’s because I know I have the votes and [am] going to win,” Meeks said.

That strategy — don’t force a vote unless the resolution can succeed — reflects the concern among some Trump critics that staging votes only to have them fail represents a roundabout form of authorization for the president to continue the war.

The earlier war powers resolution, sponsored by Reps. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) and Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), was brought to the floor less than a week after Trump joined Israeli leaders in launching massive strikes against Iran, which Trump said posed an immediate threat to national security and U.S. interests abroad. It failed by a vote of 212-219, with two Republicans crossing the aisle to support it, while four Democrats bucked their party to oppose it.

The political environment has changed since then, however, leading most of those Democratic defectors to say they’ll support the Meeks proposal.

Rep. Greg Landsman (D-Ohio) is one of them. He said the initial strikes were crucial for degrading Iran’s military powers and preventing Tehran’s Islamic regime from building nuclear weapons. But those goals have been reached, he said, and now it’s time for Trump to get Congress’s approval if he wants to continue the conflict.

“The cost of inaction was far too high to tolerate. But now it’s time to be done,” Landsman said in a statement.

Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-Texas) is also poised to switch his vote and back the Meeks resolution. He said he opposed the Massie-Khanna bill because it promoted an immediate withdrawal of forces, and Cuellar wanted to provide Trump with a 30-day window “to allow for operational realities and for the administration to present clear objectives to Congress and the American people.”

“That period has now passed,” Cuellar said on the social platform X, “and it’s time for Congress to weigh in.”

Rep. Juan Vargas (D-Calif.) surprised many Democrats when he opposed the Massie-Khanna resolution in early March. His reasoning is unique: A quarter-century ago, he and his wife took in a family of Muslim Kosovars that had been victimized by the Serbs in the late 1990s. He hailed then-President Clinton’s decision to intervene in that conflict — a 78-day bombing campaign designed largely to protect the civilians who were being murdered by the Serbs — even without congressional approval.

Vargas drew a parallel to Iran, where thousands of protestors had been killed by the Islamic regime, and he viewed the U.S.-Israel strikes as a form of humanitarian intervention on behalf of those civilians.

“I looked at this, and I said: Thank god someone’s doing something about all these kids, all these young people, that were murdered in the streets,” he said. “That was my big deal. And I wasn’t going to vote for [the Massie-Khanna resolution].”

A month into the Iran conflict, however, Vargas noted that many of Tehran’s leaders have been killed or otherwise toppled, and now he’ll “probably” support a war powers resolution if it comes to the floor.

“I think they’ve paid a big price,” he said.

The fourth Democrat to oppose the Massie-Khanna proposal is Rep. Jared Golden (Maine). His office did not respond this week to a request for comment.

It’s unclear whether there are any Republican wildcards who might influence a future war powers vote.

Massie and Rep. Warren Davidson (Ohio) were the only two Republicans to support the first Iran resolution. But Democrats say they’re talking to others who, fed up with the vague objectives and opaque exit strategy advanced by Trump, might also be ready to cross the aisle.

“We’re working on others,” Khanna said.

Jeffries has signaled the new resolution would feature different language from the Massie-Khanna proposal to reflect developments that have occurred since Trump and Israel first launched the attacks on Feb. 28.

But Rep. Adam Smith (Wash.), the senior Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee who is also working to advance the second version, said the underlying objective remains identical.

“At the end of the day, this is a vote for: Do you want to see the war continue, or don’t you?” Smith said. “I’m sure some people do. I don’t.

“I’m hoping that people look at it that way.”

Rebecca Beitsch contributed.

Copyright 2026 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

For the latest news, weather, sports, and streaming video, head to The Hill.