The US Senate has rejected a War Powers Resolution to end hostilities in Iran, with a vote of 49-50. The resolution was previously passed by the House with a vote of 220-204.
What happened
The rejected resolution was a concurrent resolution, which is non-binding and does not have the force of law. Even if the Senate had passed it, the resolution would not have gone to the president for signature or veto, due to its non-binding nature. This type of resolution has been used by Congress before, but its constitutional force has been doubtful since the 1983 Supreme Court case INS v. Chadha.
The use of concurrent resolutions has been criticized as a performative measure, allowing lawmakers to appear as though they are taking action without actually affecting the president's decisions. Congress has the power to authorize or end the war through binding legislation, but has chosen not to use this power. Instead, lawmakers have repeatedly resorted to non-binding resolutions, which do not compel the president to take action.
The War Powers Resolution of 1973 was intended to provide a mechanism for Congress to direct the president to remove American forces from unauthorized hostilities. However, the Supreme Court's decision in INS v. Chadha cast doubt on the constitutionality of this mechanism, and Congress has since created alternative procedures for binding legislation. Despite this, Congress continues to use the non-binding concurrent resolution mechanism, which has been ineffective in ending the war in Iran.
