The U.S. House of Representatives has approved a resolution aimed at restricting President Donald Trump’s ability to continue military operations against Iran without congressional approval, in a vote that exposed growing unease within his own party over the direction of the conflict.
The measure passed by 215 votes to 208 on Wednesday after four Republicans joined Democrats. It marks the House’s fourth attempt to challenge the administration’s use of military force since the U.S. and Israel launched strikes against Iran on 28 February.
Republicans Thomas Massie, Brian Fitzpatrick, Tom Barrett, and Warren Davidson backed the resolution, while Democrat Jared Golden of Maine also supported the proposal after opposing similar efforts previously.
Barrett said the issue centred on Congress’s constitutional authority to approve war. “Congress alone declares war, that’s something certainly we need to be protective of,” he said. Asked whether he feared political consequences for breaking with Trump, Barrett added, “I vote my conscience for what I think is right and willing to accept that.”
The resolution still faces an uncertain future in the Republican-controlled Senate, where a related measure advanced in May but has not yet received a full floor vote. Even if lawmakers in both chambers approve it, the proposal may not be enough to immediately halt U.S. military action.
The vote comes as fighting continues despite an initial ceasefire agreement reached by Washington and Tehran on 8 April. Iran has targeted Israel and U.S.-allied states in the Gulf, while disruption in the Strait of Hormuz has affected a key route for global shipping and energy supplies.
Gregory Meeks, the leading Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, described the vote as “a significant bipartisan rebuke of President Trump’s illegal and costly war in Iran and the first step toward ending it once and for all.”
Trump said negotiations with Iran were progressing and suggested an agreement could be close. “In theory they’re pretty close to signing a paper, we’ve actually gotten along with them very well.”