A group of Democrats in the U.S. Senate is calling for hearings on the war against Iran after receiving a series of classified briefings from officials in President Donald Trump’s administration.
Lawmakers say the White House has not clearly explained why the United States entered the conflict, what its goals are, or how long the conflict will last.
Republicans currently hold a slim 53-47 majority in the Senate, giving them control over which bills are considered.
Some Democratic lawmakers have expressed dissatisfaction following the recent closed-door conferences. President Trump has not ruled out sending U.S. ground forces to Iran.
“I just came out of a two-hour classified briefing on the war,” Sen. Chris Murphy of Connecticut said Tuesday. “It has been confirmed that the strategy is completely disjointed.
“I think it’s very simple: If the president were to do what the Constitution requires and come to Congress asking for authorization for this war, he would not be authorized because the American people would demand that their members of Congress vote against it,” he added.
Here’s what we know:
What happened so far?
Since the United States and Israel launched attacks on Iran on February 28, senior officials, including Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, have held several closed-door meetings to brief members of Congress on the military operation and its progress.
Because meetings are classified, there are limits on what lawmakers can publicly disclose about the information they receive.
What are the Democrats saying?
Several Democratic senators said they left the briefing unsatisfied, saying the administration had not provided clear answers about the war’s objectives, timeline or long-term strategy to guide its approach to the conflict.
Earlier this week, six Democratic senators also called for an investigation into the strike at a girls’ school in Minab, southern Iran. The report said US troops were involved in the attack, which killed at least 170 people, most of them children.
“It seems like there’s no end in sight,” said Democratic Sen. Richard Blumenthal. “The president said, almost in one breath, that it’s almost done, but at the same time it’s just begun. So this is kind of a contradiction.”
Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts expressed concern about the cost of the war.
“What seems clear is that we are spending $1 billion a day bombing Iran while 15 million Americans without health care have no money,” Warren said Tuesday.
“The only power Congress has is to use the power of its wallet to stop this kind of behavior,” she added.
Some seem concerned about the possibility of ground deployment.
“It appears that we are moving toward deploying U.S. forces on the ground in Iran to accomplish Iran’s potential objectives,” Blumenthal, of Connecticut, told reporters after a confidential briefing on Tuesday.
“The American people have a right to know more than what this administration has been telling them about the cost of war, the dangers to our sons and daughters in uniform, and the potential for further escalation and expansion of this war,” he added.
What are the Republicans saying?
Republicans, who hold slim majorities in both houses of Congress, have almost unanimously supported Trump’s campaign against Iran, with only a handful expressing doubts about war.
Some Republican leaders say the strikes are necessary to curb Iran’s military capabilities, missile program and regional influence.
They also argued that the operation was limited in scope and aimed at weakening Iran’s ability to threaten U.S. forces and allies in the region.
Republican Rep. Brian Mast of Florida, chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, last week publicly thanked President Trump for his actions against Iran, saying the president was using his constitutional authority to protect the United States from an “imminent threat” posed by the Iranian government.
But some Republican lawmakers have expressed concerns.
“I don’t want to send South Carolina’s sons and daughters to war with Iran,” South Carolina Representative Nancy Mace said in a post on X.
Republican Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky accused the Trump administration of changing the narrative and rationale for the war on a daily basis.
“We keep hearing new reasons for war with Iran, but nothing convincing. The words ‘liberate the oppressed’ sound noble, but where is the end? We have been told for decades that Iran is weeks away from a nuclear attack. War should be a last resort, not a first action. The war chosen is not my choice,” he wrote to X.
Why is discussion important?
The controversy reignited a long-running debate in Washington, D.C., about the limits of presidential war powers.
Under the U.S. Constitution, Congress has the power to declare war, but modern presidents frequently launch military operations without formal approval from Congress, citing national security or emergency threats.
The law allows the president to deploy U.S. troops for up to 60 days without Congressional approval, followed by a 30-day withdrawal period if Congress does not approve.
Some lawmakers and legal experts say the war against Iran highlights the need for greater congressional oversight of military actions.
“In the 1970s, we adopted something called the War Powers Resolution, which gave the president limited authority to do this,” said David Schultz, a professor at Hamline University’s School of Political Science and Law.
“So you could argue that what the president is doing…is unconstitutional in that it’s not a formal declaration of war, and b. it’s beyond the president’s authority as commander-in-chief or under the War Powers Act,” he added.
“Therefore, one could argue domestically that his actions were illegal and unconstitutional,” Stolz said.
The Trump administration has argued that the Feb. 28 airstrike was justified in response to an “imminent threat,” an argument often used by presidents to justify military action without prior approval from Congress.
But U.S. intelligence agencies themselves said before the war began that there was no evidence of an imminent Iranian threat to the United States or its facilities across the Middle East.
