Under the 1973 law, Congress must authorize military action within 60 days of its start or require its end. The deadline followed U.S. operations that began on Feb. 28, but Senate Republicans took no action before leaving for a one-week recess.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune said he did not expect a vote on authorizing force in Iran, while Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth argued the deadline no longer applied because a ceasefire with Iran that began in early April had effectively paused the conflict.

Democrats rejected that claim, saying U.S. military operations continue as the Navy enforces a blockade linked to the Strait of Hormuz crisis.

Some Republicans, including Senators Lisa Murkowski and Susan Collins, said Congress should still have a formal role, with Collins calling the deadline “a requirement” and not a suggestion.

The measure, introduced by Democratic Senator Tim Kaine of Virginia under the War Powers Act of 1973, would have required Trump to end U.S. actions enforcing restrictions on Cuba unless Congress explicitly authorized them.

Democrats argued that Washington’s use of Coast Guard and other federal assets to disrupt oil shipments and tighten sanctions amounted to hostilities that should fall under congressional oversight.Republicans moved to dismiss the resolution, arguing it was procedurally out of order because the United States was not engaged in direct military hostilities with Cuba.

Their motion succeeded in a 51-47 vote.Pennsylvania Senator John Fetterman was the only Democrat to vote with Republicans in dismissing the resolution, while Republican Senators Susan Collins of Maine and Rand Paul of Kentucky joined Democrats in supporting it.The vote marked the first Senate test specifically focused on Cuba as Democrats continue to challenge Trump’s military and strategic actions in several theaters, including Iran and Venezuela.

Previous efforts to constrain the administration’s authority under the War Powers Act have failed.Kaine said U.S. enforcement measures had triggered severe humanitarian consequences on the island, including worsening water shortages, electricity outages and disruptions to medical care.

“My argument is that under the terms of the resolution we are already engaged in hostilities with Cuba because we are using American force, primarily the Coast Guard, but other assets as well, to engage in a very devastating economic blockade of the nation,” Kaine said during Senate debate.

Cuba has been grappling with prolonged shortages of fuel, food and medicine, while U.S. sanctions and interruptions to Venezuelan oil shipments have added pressure to the island’s struggling economy.The Trump administration has said its policy aims to pressure Cuba’s leadership to end political repression, release political prisoners and implement economic liberalization.

Trump, speaking after the recent conflict with Iran, said Cuba would be a next foreign policy priority and pledged “a new dawn for Cuba” during remarks last week at a Turning Points USA event.Democratic Senator Peter Welch of Vermont said the resolution was intended not only to challenge the blockade but also to prevent the possibility of direct military escalation.

“The United States and Cuba need to find a way to peacefully coexist,” Welch said.Republican Senator Rick Scott of Florida defended Trump’s approach and accused Democrats of overlooking rights abuses by Cuba’s government.“President Trump is doing everything he can to bring back freedom and democracy all across Latin America, and we should do everything we can to support him,” Scott said.

The War Powers Act, passed in 1973 following the Vietnam War, was designed to reassert congressional authority over decisions involving U.S. military engagement abroad, requiring presidents to notify Congress and limiting unauthorized hostilities.

Shawn VanDiver, a U.S. military veteran who heads AfghanEvac, said he had been briefed that the administration of Donald Trump was weighing the proposal for more than 1,100 Afghans housed at a former U.S. base in Qatar.

The group includes individuals who had worked with U.S. forces and fear reprisals from the Taliban after their return to power in 2021.The administration had set a March 31 deadline to close the as-Sayliyah camp, which has served as a processing hub for Afghans seeking relocation to the United States following the collapse of the Western-backed Afghan government.

VanDiver criticized the reported plan, saying it would effectively pressure Afghans to return to their home country. “You do not relocate vetted wartime allies, more than 400 of them children, from American custody into a country in the middle of its own collapse,” he said.

The U.S. State Department did not confirm whether Congo was under consideration but said authorities were exploring “voluntary resettlement” options for those remaining in Qatar. A spokesperson described relocation to a third country as a potential pathway to safety while maintaining U.S. security priorities.

Democratic Senator Tim Kaine criticized the reported option, saying the United States had an obligation to protect Afghan partners who assisted during the two-decade conflict.More than 190,000 Afghans have been resettled in the United States since 2021 under a program initiated by Joe Biden, with most living without incident.

The effort initially drew bipartisan support but has since been affected by policy changes.The Trump administration has curtailed broader refugee resettlement programs and paused processing for some Afghan applicants following a fatal shooting incident in Washington last year involving an Afghan national.