If President Donald Trump can find a diplomatic off-ramp for the war with Iran, he may have no choice but to face congressional scrutiny over it.
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) has publicly made the case on X for congressional review of any potential peace deal with Iran. Graham’s call could have a statutory underpinning thanks to a decade-old law that allows lawmakers to vote on any nuclear-related agreement the U.S. reaches with Tehran.
“Fair and challenging questions with a full opportunity to explain, and a healthy dose of sunlight is generally the right formula to understand any matter,” Graham said this week.
Then-Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) was one of the original co-sponsors of the Senate version of the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act when it was introduced — and passed unanimously — 11 years ago. Now, as secretary of state, Rubio is part of an administration that could be beholden to pieces of it.
Aides from both parties say the 2015 law could apply if there’s an explicit nuclear component of an eventual U.S.-Iran peace deal. But there’s an exceedingly high threshold that Congress would need to clear in order to actually block any diplomatic pact. Plus, depending on the finer details, the White House could try to sidestep a formal submission to Congress altogether.
Under INARA, any lawmaker could force a vote on a joint resolution of disapproval. These would require a simple majority in the House, but would be subject to cloture — 60 votes — in the Senate. Trump could veto the resolution, but Congress can override him with a two-thirds majority vote in both chambers.
A disapproval vote over former President Barack Obama’s 2015 Iran nuclear deal fell short of 60 votes, despite a handful of Democratic defections.
At what cost? The politics of such a vote could be incredibly difficult for many vulnerable Republicans. Hawkish GOP lawmakers may find a reason to oppose a diplomatic deal simply because they believe the United States should continue pummeling Iran in order to topple the regime for good and eliminate the country’s nuclear capabilities via military means.
Some lawmakers and aides also interpreted Graham’s call for congressional review as a slight toward Vice President JD Vance, who’s been charged with helping lead the peace talks during what has now become a very fragile two-week ceasefire. Vance has long opposed American adventurism abroad — something that put him at odds with his former Senate GOP colleagues. He also was against this war, per the New York Times.
Many Republicans are skeptical that a diplomatic agreement can be reached. In some ways, Republicans have boxed themselves in by previously declaring that any deal with Tehran can’t allow uranium enrichment.
“If the agreement allows enrichment, it will be very difficult for Republicans to vote for it,” a senior GOP aide said.
There’s also still the question of what will happen to the existing stores of enriched uranium that Tehran possesses. At the outset of U.S. military operations, the administration documented the current stockpiles Iran has. This includes some 10,000 kilograms of enriched uranium that — while none was enriched at the weapons-grade threshold of 90% — put Tehran within reach of restarting its military nuclear aspirations.