The U.S. House of Representatives narrowly passed a resolution on Thursday aiming to halt military action in Iran, reflecting mounting concern among lawmakers as the conflict escalates. The 214-208 vote, led by Representative Pramila Jayapal (D-Washington), requires congressional approval for continued war efforts and marks the second significant congressional challenge to President Donald Trump’s approach to the conflict.

Despite the House’s approval, the Senate blocked consideration of a similar resolution hours later in a closely fought 49-47 procedural vote. Senator Susan Collins (R-Maine) was the sole Republican senator to join Democrats in supporting the measure, while Senator John Fetterman (D-Pennsylvania) voted against it, underscoring divisions within both parties.

The conflict began in late February with a series of joint airstrikes by U.S. and Israeli forces against Iranian targets. Although a ceasefire was reached in April, Trump declared it ended earlier this month and authorized renewed attacks. The administration maintains that these actions are necessary to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon and insists they do not represent a broad or long-term war. The White House’s statement ahead of the votes emphasized the President’s constitutional authority to defend the country and discouraged lawmakers from passing the resolutions, characterizing them as nonbinding.

Opponents of the war resolution argue that withdrawing congressional support risks emboldening Iran and undermining U.S. service members engaged in the conflict. Senator Tim Sheehy (R-Montana), a Navy SEAL veteran, contended that the resolution would send a harmful message to troops fighting overseas. Similarly, Representative Brian Mast (R-Florida) invoked the sacrifices of fallen service members to justify continued military operations, citing the need to hold Iran accountable for attacks against Americans.

However, critics of the conflict, including both Democrats and a few Republicans, warn of the war’s cost and lack of clear objectives. Maryland Senator Chris Van Hollen, who spearheaded the Senate resolution, described the war as unpopular and lacking a defined mission or end goal. He and others expressed concern about rising fuel prices and broader economic disruption resulting from the hostilities. Representative Bill Cassidy (R-Louisiana), who initially supported earlier war powers resolutions but reversed his position after receiving briefings from the White House, highlighted frustrations over the conflict’s duration and unclear results.

The votes come amid ongoing debate over the war’s legality and congressional authority. Democrats argue the administration is conducting military operations without proper congressional authorization and have vowed to continue pressing the issue, including efforts to compel Trump to provide explanations to Congress. Representative Gregory Meeks (D-New York) indicated plans to introduce a resolution to challenge the administration’s refusal to cooperate on congressional oversight.

Although the Senate’s procedural vote blocked immediate further action, Senator Tim Kaine (D-Virginia) maintained that the substantive point remains valid: both chambers have signaled to the President that continued military engagement requires congressional approval or troop withdrawal. He also signaled a shift toward addressing the conflict’s funding through appropriations.

With the midterm elections approaching and substantial military costs projected—U.S. Central Command estimates expenses around $37.5 billion by the end of September—the debate over the U.S. role in Iran continues to be a contentious issue on Capitol Hill. Republicans face political risks in opposing the President’s strategy, though some have privately questioned the administration’s handling of the war. Meanwhile, Democrats persist in efforts to assert congressional authority and limit U.S. involvement amid an increasingly uncertain conflict landscape.