60 days, then the end? Trump's Iran war at the tipping point - the US president still has these options
With the expiry of a crucial deadline, the US offensive against Iran is coming under legal pressure. What options does the US President have and what role does Congress play?
30.04.2026, 10:08
dpa
No time? blue News summarizes for you
- The legal deadline for Trump's military action in Iran is expiring, theoretically forcing him to involve Congress.
- In practice, however, there are several ways the US could continue the operation.
- Previous presidents have already circumvented similar restrictions, which is why a political and legal dispute is looming.
The clock is ticking for Donald Trump: The deadline will soon expire for the US president to command the deployment of the US military against Iran on his own initiative. After that, he would need the approval of Congress - at least in theory.
It is not entirely clear when exactly this will be the case, whether at the end of April 30 or May 1, due to various possible counting methods. What happens next in the Iran war, which is currently under a ceasefire? An overview:
On what basis does the deadline for Trump end?
The presidential term limit goes back to the War Powers Resolution Act, which was passed in 1973 as a result of the Vietnam War. It is intended to ensure the constitutional separation of powers: While the president, as commander-in-chief, commands the troops, Congress alone may declare and fund a war. The "New York Times" summarizes it as follows: "Presidents have control over the conduct of wars, but they do not decide whether the country goes to war."
The law obliges the President to inform Congress of military operations within 48 hours of launching an offensive. Trump informed Parliament on March 2, after the war had begun on February 28.
Without the formal approval of Congress, combat operations must cease after 60 days. This is intended to prevent the USA from being drawn into protracted, illegitimate operations.
Exactly when this deadline expires in the current case is not entirely clear. Depending on how it is counted, the 60 days specified in the legal text could end on the night of April 30 to May 1 or on the night of May 1 to 2 (0.00 a.m. local time in each case, 6.00 a.m. in Germany).
Trump would then be forced to gradually withdraw the American troops. Even though there is currently a ceasefire between the USA and Iran, this would still apply to the naval forces and ships responsible for maintaining the US blockade of Iranian ports.
Does this automatically mean that the US offensive will end?
No. It is true that the legal basis for offensive strikes expires at the end of the 60-day period. In practice, however, there are three scenarios as to how the offensive could continue:
- The 30-day grace period: the law grants a one-off grace period of 30 days. The basis for this is that the President determines an "unavoidable military necessity" for the continued deployment of the armed forces in order to be able to safely withdraw troops. The commander-in-chief must inform Congress of this in writing. Critics fear that Trump could use this phase for new maneuvers that would effectively continue the offensive.
- Declaration of self-defense: The president can argue that there is an imminent threat to national security. In this case, the White House often claims primacy over the law.
- Political stalemate: If Trump continues the offensive, Congress can stop the funding and thus stop the war. However, Trump could veto this. To break this, Parliament would then need two-thirds of the votes of all congressmen and senators present. As the Republicans have a wafer-thin majority in both chambers, this is considered unlikely.
The New York Times firmly believes that "Trump and the Republican majorities in the House and Senate will ignore the bill." Instead, they are likely to look for paraphrases for the US offensive with which they can legitimize the combat operations for themselves.
This could shift the dispute over the legality of the Iran war to the courts in future. Democrats are already working on lawsuits to stop the war.
Would Trump be the first president to bypass Congress?
Not at all. In practice, the law has proven to be ineffective since it was passed: Vague wording, numerous exceptions and ever new loopholes have made it easier for presidents to circumvent the requirements. Bill Clinton, for example, continued the air strikes in Kosovo beyond the 60-day deadline in 1999.
In 2011, Barack Obama also argued that "US operations in Libya do not involve sustained combat operations or active firefights with hostile forces, nor do they involve the use of US ground forces". The decision provoked cross-party criticism at the time.
