Senate Republicans are increasingly skeptical about the future of U.S. military engagement in Iran as the 60-day deadline for the war mandated by the War Powers Resolution approaches.

Under the 1973 law, the president cannot sustain military operations for more than 60 days without congressional authorization or a formal declaration of war, after which U.S. forces must be withdrawn. The White House can request a 30-day extension — with written justification to Congress — should it present “unavoidable military necessity.” 

Short of a formal declaration of war, Congress can authorize continued operations through an Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF), similar to that enacted following the 9/11 attacks, which would provide the legal basis for the administration to sustain the campaign. 

But the prospects for such a measure remain uncertain, as it would require a high-stakes public vote that could divide Republicans.

With the 60-day deadline approaching this week, GOP lawmakers told Jewish Insider they expect the White House to comply with the statute and notify Congress of a 30-day extension — though they remain uncertain and divided over whether they would support authorizing continued military action.

Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC) said he will not “quibble” over whether the exact deadline is met, however he stressed that the White House should respect the law on the books. 

“I’m not going to quibble over a day or two, but people are saying we don’t know if the War Powers Resolution is constitutional … the reality is it’s on the books, ratified by Congress,” Tillis said. “[The White House should] follow it and at least ask for an extension, and give us clarity on why you need the extension beyond the 60 days. Then it gives them 30 days to be clear on what they need for the appropriations request,” he said, referring to the coming supplemental funding request from the administration. 

Tillis did not indicate whether he believed an authorization would be needed, but said he would “support an AUMF that is drafted and supported by Republicans.” He called the recent rounds of war powers votes initiated by Democrats “political theater.”

“They’re not a serious effort to understand the details of what the president wants to accomplish and then provide congressional support to do it,” Tillis said. “I think if we do that, it strengthens our hand in dealing with the murderers posing as the mullahs of Iran.” 

Sen. Mike Rounds (R-SD) did not commit to whether he would support an AUMF. He told JI that it will depend on several factors, including an explanation from the White House. 

“It’ll depend on the information that they [the White House] provide to us, and we’ll see if they’re actually intending to stay there for an extended period of time, or if they’re going to have boots on the ground, or whether they’re going to be withdrawing from the area based on any kind of peace agreement,” Rounds said. 

Rounds said his “expectation” is that the White House will “notify us [Congress] of an additional 30-day extension.”

 “We’ve begun the process now of both classified and an open hearing tomorrow,” Rounds said, referring to a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing taking place on Thursday with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Dan Caine. “So I think now steps will start to happen in terms of a more complete congressional review.” 

However, Rounds noted that regardless of where the war heads, he expects that “this chapter in our history has not closed.”

“I suspect we’re still going to have to deal with an Iranian regime, which is a threat to the entire world,” he said. 

Tillis said he had not heard anything on the White House potentially asking for a 30-day extension, but said in response to Rounds’ comments that  “[Rounds] is on the Senate Armed Services committee, so that’s good news. I would expect Senate Armed Services Committee members to know before me. That’s good.” 

Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) also did not signal whether he would support an AUMF. While he noted that he believes the White House has “been very careful to follow the war powers framework this whole conflict,” he stressed that he would like to see hostilities wind down and is skeptical of voting for a move that opens up the conflict further. 

“Hopefully [there will be] an end to the war,” Hawley said, adding that he hopes “the president and secretary of state will be able to come back to Congress [and say] that they’re working to end the conflict and that active hostilities are over.” 

He added that he wants the White House to do something “better than ask for 30 more days.”

“Clearly the president is trying to get to a peace deal here, I mean he says it everyday. It’s clear what he’s trying to do. He does not want to go back,” Hawley said. “We’re not bombing. He has said he doesn’t want to go back to that, which I agree with by the way. So I think we should bring this to a close.” President Donald Trump said on Wednesday that he’s rejecting Iran’s latest proposal to end the war as it omits any concessions on the country’s nuclear program.

Hawley said that Congress “can always debate an AUMF” if the White House doesn’t ask for a 30-day extension, but emphasized that he would prefer to “keep on that track” of winding down the war. 

“I don’t really want to authorize a war, I want to end it,” Hawley said. “If we can’t, if the administration doesn’t ask for more time, if there are no additional certifications from them, I think we’re in AUMF territory, which would be kind of unfortunate. I would prefer not to vote to open up a conflict that I think ought to be wound down.”

Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX), meanwhile, said that he would be “open” to supporting an AUMF, but “would be skeptical that it could pass.” He added that Trump is “relying on his own power within the Constitution.” 

“We don’t have any American troops on the ground, and I don’t think that’s the president’s idea,” Cornyn said. “I mean, we’ve seriously degraded their ability to threaten their neighbors and that’s a good thing.”

“But unfortunately, it looks like now the supreme leader is out of the picture, that the more radical IRGC elements [are coming to power], which you can’t trust them so I wouldn’t trust any agreement that you might have,” Cornyn added. “I think President Trump ought to finish the job he started and make sure there’s not a threat to us or to the region for the foreseeable future.”