2026年4月30日 / 美国东部时间早上7:12 / 哥伦比亚广播公司（CBS）新闻
作者：凯特琳·伊莱克 政治记者
凯特琳·伊莱克是CBS新闻驻华盛顿特区的政治记者。她曾就职于《华盛顿考察家报》和《国会山报》，并入选美国国家新闻基金会2022年保罗·米勒华盛顿报道奖学金项目。
阅读完整个人简介
华盛顿讯——根据一项数十年前的法律，在没有国会授权的情况下限制武力使用的规定，特朗普总统将于周五迎来与伊朗战争的关键期限。
1973年《战争权力决议》规定了立法者必须何时接到敌对行动通知，以及在国会未授权的情况下，总统必须何时从冲突中撤出美军的时间线。
根据该法律，总统需在将美军投入敌对行动后48小时内向国会提交正式通知，这将正式启动60天倒计时，除非国会已宣战或授权使用武力，否则总统必须终止军事行动。
60天期限窗口
伊朗战争于2月28日爆发。特朗普在3月2日的信函中正式通知国会领导人有关敌对行动的情况，由此启动的60天倒计时将于周五到期。
该法律允许总统将期限再延长30天，以便安全撤离军队，但并未授予其继续发动进攻性战役的权力。
“这不是让总统可以随心所欲继续任何敌对行动的30天空白支票，”政府监督项目的宪法项目负责人大卫·雅诺夫斯基说道。
周五的截止日期可能最终引发与国会共和党人的冲突。共和党人此前一直不愿在战争问题上与特朗普决裂，这场战争的持续时间已远超他最初预测的四至五周，且尚未达成明确解决方案。自美国与伊朗在4月8日达成停火以允许就更广泛的和解进行谈判以来，战斗基本处于暂停状态。
自战争爆发以来，众议院和参议院的共和党议员已阻止了六项民主党提出的战争权力决议，这些决议明确限制特朗普进一步打击伊朗的能力。一些共和党议员表示，在法定60天期限过后，他们的立场可能会改变。
犹他州共和党参议员约翰·柯蒂斯表示，他“不会支持在未经国会批准的情况下，将军事行动延长至60天期限之后”。
“60天的期限足以让总统应对国家威胁采取紧急措施，随后将是否应该宣战并继续战争的决定权交给民选代表，”他在本月早些时候的一篇专栏文章中写道。
密苏里州共和党参议员乔希·霍利告诉记者，“必须遵守这项法律”，并补充说他希望战争能在60天期限前结束。
“我认为我们需要一个撤军战略，”他在4月15日说道。
南达科他州共和党人、参议院多数党领袖约翰·图恩本月早些时候被问及议员们需要在何时核查总统的战争权力时，表示政府需要“一项如何逐步结束冲突的计划”。
阿拉斯加州共和党参议员丽莎·穆尔科斯基正在起草一份针对伊朗使用武力的正式授权法案，但尚未提交立法程序。该法案是否能获得足够支持通过仍不确定。
参众两院的民主党议员最近几周提出了一系列战争权力决议。他们计划就该问题持续推动投票，迫使共和党同事就这场民调显示不受欢迎的战争表明立场。
持续的敌对行动
战争将如何收场尚不明朗。上周，特朗普无限期延长了与伊朗的停火协议。几天后，他突然取消了其两名高级谈判代表前往巴基斯坦伊斯兰堡参加第二轮和谈的计划。伊朗核计划的命运仍是核心问题，而对霍尔木兹海峡——这一关键石油咽喉要道的对峙引发了能源危机。
如果总统希望在未经国会批准的情况下继续战争，布伦南中心自由与国家安全项目的律师凯瑟琳·扬·埃布里表示，法律事务办公室可能会辩称，停火已经终止了60天倒计时，任何进一步的敌对行动都将重新启动倒计时。但她表示，“从该法律的文本或设计初衷来看，这都是《战争权力决议》所不允许的”。
“但行政部门律师蓄意曲解《战争权力决议》以允许总统在60天倒计时后继续开展敌对行动的历史由来已久，”埃布里说道。
2011年，奥巴马政府辩称，在60天期限过后，美国对利比亚的空袭无需国会批准，因为根据该法律的定义，这些行动未达到“敌对行动”的级别，且未涉及美国地面部队。
1999年，克林顿政府在法定期限过后继续在科索沃开展轰炸行动，辩称议员们已通过批准相关拨款授权了这些行动。
国会从未成功利用《战争权力决议》终止过一场军事行动。2019年，一项旨在结束美国在也门军事参与的决议在两院获得两党支持通过后，被特朗普否决。国会未能获得足够票数推翻否决。
雅诺夫斯基表示，《战争权力决议》自颁布以来一直“相当无效”。
“回顾50年的《战争权力决议》历史，很难说它成功限制了总统的行动，”他说道。
法院在战争权力问题上基本保持沉默，埃布里表示，让法院就伊朗战争的合宪性作出裁决将是“一项艰难的任务”。
但她表示，《战争权力决议》也起到了政治约束作用。例如，今年1月，有少数共和党人协助推进了一项限制特朗普对委内瑞拉采取行动的议案。一些议员在获得特朗普政府不会派遣地面部队的保证后改变了支持立场。国务卿马可·卢比奥也同意向国会作证，以阻止政府内部的倒戈。
“过去一年我们看到的是，《战争权力决议》在政治领域发挥的作用远大于法律领域，”埃布里说道。
As Iran war nears key 60-day deadline, Congress and Trump face choices on next steps
April 30, 2026 / 7:12 AM EDT / CBS News
By Caitlin Yilek Politics Reporter
Caitlin Yilek is a politics reporter at CBSNews.com, based in Washington, D.C. She previously worked for the Washington Examiner and The Hill, and was a member of the 2022 Paul Miller Washington Reporting Fellowship with the National Press Foundation.
Read Full Bio
Washington — President Trump faces a key deadline in the war with Iran on Friday under a decades-old law that limits the use of force without authorization from Congress.
The War Powers Resolution of 1973 lays out a timeline for when lawmakers must be notified of hostilities and when a president is required to withdraw American forces from a conflict in the absence of congressional authorization.
Under the law, the president is required to give formal notification to Congress within 48 hours of introducing American forces into hostilities, which officially begins a 60-day clock for the president to terminate the use of force unless Congress has declared war or authorized the use of military force.
The 60-day window
The Iran war began Feb. 28. Mr. Trump formally informed congressional leaders of the hostilities in a March 2 letter, starting the 60-day clock that expires Friday.
The law allows the president to extend the period for an additional 30 days to safely withdraw forces from hostilities, but it does not grant him authority to continue an offensive campaign.
“It’s not a 30-day blank check for the president to continue whatever hostilities he sees fit,” said David Janovsky, who leads the Constitution Project at the Project on Government Oversight.
Friday’s deadline could set up an eventual clash with Republicans in Congress, who have largely been reluctant to break with Mr. Trump on the war, which has extended beyond the four to five weeks he initially predicted without a firm resolution. The fighting has been mostly paused since the U.S. and Iran agreed to a ceasefire on April 8 to allow for talks on a broader settlement.
Since the start of the war, Republicans in the House and Senate have blocked more than half a dozen Democratic war powers resolutions that would explicitly limit Mr. Trump’s ability to further strike Iran. Some GOP members have indicated that their stance could change after the statutory 60-day deadline.
Republican Sen. John Curtis of Utah said that he would “not support ongoing military action beyond a 60-day window without congressional approval.”
“A period of 60 days is a fully sufficient window for presidents to take emergency measures in response to a national threat and then remit a decision to the duly elected representatives of the people as to whether a state of war should in fact be declared and continued,” he wrote in an opinion piece earlier this month.
Republican Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri told reporters “the statute does need to be followed,” adding that he hoped the war would conclude by the 60-day deadline.
“I think we need an exit strategy,” he said on April 15.
Asked earlier this month at what point lawmakers need to check the president’s war authority, Senate Majority Leader John Thune, a South Dakota Republican, said the administration needs “a plan for how to wind this down.”
Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska is drafting a formal authorization for the use of military force in Iran, but has not yet introduced the legislation. Whether there’s enough support to pass such a measure is uncertain.
Democrats in both chambers have introduced a slew of war powers resolutions in recent weeks. They plan to keep forcing votes on the issue to put their Republican colleagues on the record regarding the war that polls show is unpopular.
Continuing hostilities
It’s unclear how the war will end. Last week, Mr. Trump extended the ceasefire with Iran indefinitely. Days later, he abruptly called off plans for two of his top negotiators to travel to Islamabad, Pakistan, for a second round of peace talks. The fate of Iran’s nuclear program remains a central issue and the standoff over the Strait of Hormuz, a vital oil chokepoint, has created an energy crisis.
If the president wishes to continue the war without congressional approval, Katherine Yon Ebright, an attorney at the Brennan Center’s Liberty and National Security Program, said it’s possible that the Office of Legal Counsel tries to argue that the ceasefire stopped the 60-day clock and any further hostilities reset the clock altogether. But she said “that is not something that by its text or by its design the War Powers Resolution accommodates.”
“But there is a long history of executive branch lawyers willfully misinterpreting the War Powers Resolution to allow presidents to conduct hostilities even past that 60-day clock,” Ebright said.
In 2011, the Obama administration argued that it did not need congressional approval for air strikes against Libya past the 60-day mark because the operations did not rise to the level of “hostilities” within the meaning of the law and because they did not involve American ground troops.
In 1999, the Clinton administration continued its bombing campaign in Kosovo past the statutory deadline, arguing that lawmakers had authorized the operations by approving funding for it.
Congress has never successfully used the War Powers Resolution to end a military campaign. Mr. Trump vetoed a resolution that sought to end U.S. military involvement in Yemen after it passed both chambers with bipartisan support in 2019. Congress did not have the votes to override the veto.
Janovsky said the War Powers Resolution has been “fairly ineffective” since its enactment.
“It’s very hard to look back on the 50-year history of the War Powers Resolution and say that it has successfully constrained presidential action,” he said.
The courts have been largely silent on the issue of war powers and getting a court to make a ruling on the merits of the constitutionality of the Iran war would be a “tough sell,” Ebright said.
But she said the War Powers Resolution has also served as a political constraint. For example, a handful of Republicans helped advance a measure in January to rein in Mr. Trump on Venezuela. Some flipped their support after receiving assurances from the Trump administration that it wouldn’t use ground troops. Secretary of State Marco Rubio also agreed to testify to Congress as the administration worked to stave off defections.
“What we’ve seen in the past year is the War Powers Resolution acting in the political sphere much more so than in the legal sphere,” Ebright said.
发表回复