Skip to main content

Military action against Iran formally restarted last week, Trump told lawmakers

▶ Watch Video: Is the U.S. fighting an unwinnable war with Iran?

President Trump formally notified Congress that “military action” against Iran restarted last week, according to a letter obtained by CBS News on Monday, as a monthslong ceasefire comes to an end.

Military action “commenced on July 7,” the president said in a message dated July 10 and addressed to Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa, the Senate’s president pro tempore. 

The letter was sent after Mr. Trump declared the U.S.-Iran ceasefire “over” and ordered several rounds of strikes on Iranian targets, in response to Iranian attacks on commercial vessels in the Strait of Hormuz last week. Iranian authorities have insisted that ships seek permission and use an Iranian-approved route before transiting the strait, and responded to the U.S. strikes by launching missiles and drones at U.S.-allied Gulf states.

Mr. Trump also announced Monday that the U.S. was reimposing a blockade on Iranian ports and vessels.

The notification to Congress calls the most recent strikes “limited, measured, planned, and executed in a manner designed to minimize civilian casualties.” The goal, Mr. Trump wrote, is to target Iranian military sites that pose a threat to U.S. forces and commercial shipping.

Under the War Powers Resolution of 1973, a post-Vietnam War law, the president must notify Congress within 48 hours of the start of military hostilities. Shortly after the U.S.-Iran war began in late February, the White House sent a notification to Congress, but the Trump administration’s position was that hostilities had “terminated” after the two sides signed a ceasefire in early April.

In last week’s letter to lawmakers, Mr. Trump wrote that the U.S. had engaged in “productive, good-faith efforts to achieve a diplomatic solution to Iran’s malign behavior,” leading the two countries to ink a memorandum of understanding last month. But he said Iran’s attacks on three oil tankers early last week violated a provision of the deal that requires Iran to arrange for safe transit through the Strait of Hormuz, leading to U.S. strikes.

“United States Armed Forces remain postured to take further action, as necessary and appropriate, to address further threats and attacks upon the United States or its allies and partners and to ensure the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran ceases being a threat to the United States and to our allies and partners,” the letter says. 

The War Powers Resolution limits military hostilities to 60 days unless Congress votes to authorize military force, with an extra 30-day grace period if the president determines more time is necessary to safely withdraw U.S. forces. The Trump administration has argued that provision of the law is unconstitutional, but it has never been tested in court, and some members of both parties have argued Mr. Trump should seek permission from Congress if hostilities last longer than 60 days.

Both the House and Senate passed a resolution last month seeking to limit Mr. Trump’s ability to carry out further military action against Iran without congressional authorization. Democrats have said they’re considering their legal options to force Mr. Trump to comply. The president has argued that he is acting under his constitutional authority.

The Senate later rejected a similar war powers measure, with some key Republicans suggesting they wanted to give more time for the Trump administration’s diplomatic push with Iran to play out.

Now, as the U.S. resumes strikes against Iran and as Mr. Trump expresses pessimism about U.S.-Iran negotiations, it’s unclear how Republican lawmakers will react.

Republican Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky, a longtime critic of the Iran war, told reporters that the war “never stopped,” and argued the administration is not complying with the War Powers Resolution’s 60-day time limit.

“They’re literally trying to steer around it by pretending you can play stop-start and restart the clock,” he said Monday.

In a statement Monday, Democratic Sen. Adam Schiff of California said “any assertion by the Trump administration that he gets 60 more days to act without Congress has no foundation in law.” 

Schiff announced that he had introduced a new war powers resolution that directs the removal of U.S. armed forces from hostilities with Iran and rejects the Trump administration’s assertion that the 60-day clock stopped in April when Tehran and Washington agreed to a ceasefire, though both sides continued to exchange fire. 

French has become a sticking point in the Canada-US trade dispute. Here’s why

(CNN) — As a trade war between the United States and Canada looms following the collapse of talks last week, a key issue has emerged that’s further inflamed tensions between the longtime allies: French language laws.Canada is a bilingual country and has laws protecting both of its official languages: English and French, the first language spoken for roughly one fifth of the population, including nearly 85% of primarily Francophone province of Quebec.Among the laws, product labels must be displayed in both English and French, and US streaming platforms must support and promote Canadian content (including Indigenous and French Canadian content) to audiences north of the border.Canada’s language requirements have long been viewed by the US as a trade barrier but are generally a red line for Ottawa — which Prime Minister Mark Carney enforced by walking away from a deal which he said included “threats to French language and culture.”On Monday, Carney said Canada “could not accept” the proposed deal that would have weakened French language protections, telling reporters that his government “will not give (the US) what they have asked.”Many in Canada have rallied behind Carney’s decision — and particularly his comments about protecting French culture, a core part of Canada’s national identity.After US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer called Ottawa’s concerns about French a “funny, fake story” on Monday, the Canadian leader denied the issue was a laughing matter, saying there is an “enormous gap between our perspective and the US perspective.”“For Americans, French language, Francophone culture, Canadian culture, these are irritants,” Carney said in French at a news conference in Lévis, Quebec.“Here in Quebec, here in Canada, these are rights,” he said, as a group of reporters applauded.President Donald Trump has not directly addressed the French issue but revived old attacks on Canada, calling the country “entitled” and “among the worst Nations in the World to deal with” in a Truth Social post Monday.Since negotiations stalled Friday, the US has imposed 50% tariffs on roughly $20 billion worth of Canadian goods, which Carney said he will match “dollar-for-dollar.” The tit-for-tat measures are set to take effect on September 8.Language rights vital part of Canadian identityLanguage rights have been entrenched in Canada’s constitution for decades and are particularly important to Quebec, which has fought to protect its distinct linguistic and cultural identity in an English-dominated North America.This pursuit has at times put the province at odds with the rest of Canada. Quebec has twice held a referendum on whether to secede from the rest of the country, most recently in a 1995 vote where the “no” side won by a razor-thin margin of just 1.16%.Language laws include everything from the right for Canadians to access official services in both languages to the requirement that hair care companies display the French “shampooing” alongside English text on their bottles.For US companies looking to do business in Canada, this means added barriers as they must redesign packaging and pay extra production costs.Stewart Prest, a lecturer in the Department of Political Science at the University of British Columbia, said asking Canada to bend these rules is “not a reasonable request of the Canadian government in a trade negotiation,” and one Canada has “no choice but to say no to.”“People in Canada speak French. It’s not a country where everybody speaks English, and some people like to dabble in French,” he said. “It is not so different than asking France to relax its requirement that packaging must include French.”It’s common for service workers in Montreal to greet customers with “Bonjour-Hi.”Under any circumstance, it would be incredibly detrimental to Carney, who has built a global profile for standing up to Trump, to bow on an issue so central to Canadian identity, said Stéphanie Chouinard, associate professor of political studies at Royal Military College and Queen’s University in Kingston, Ontario.But the matter is particularly acute with Quebec just weeks away from a provincial election where the separatist Parti Québécois is surging in the polls, she said.The party’s leader recently said he would delay a possible independence referendum until Trump’s term ends — but any concession on language laws could “stoke secessionist sentiment” in the province where independence talk has been on the back burner, Chouinard said.At odds with WashingtonQuebec has implemented strict nationalist policies in recent years to reinforce French as the province’s sole language, including through the controversial language law Bill 96, which includes stricter requirements for French on products, appliances, packaging and signage.The legislation was included on the 2025 list of global trade barriers compiled annually by the Office of the US Trade Representative.The US has also expressed concerns about Canada’s Online Streaming Act, which requires online video and music services like Netflix and Spotify to invest in and promote Canadian content.Washington also opposed another streaming regulation, known as Bill 109, passed in Quebec last December, which compels streaming platforms to prioritize French-language content. In March, the US listed the measure as a potential trade barrier in its trade estimate report.Greer, in an interview with CNBC Monday, said the US does not have an issue with the French language but rather what he called a “discriminatory tax on American companies.”“I like the Quebecois, and I like that they speak French. What we don’t like is a situation where Canada’s federal government forces American tech companies to take their earnings and give a percentage to their competitors,” he said.For many in Canada, the dispute raises concerns about American interference with Canada’s national identity.Quebec’s Premier Christine Fréchette said Carney made the right decision to walk away from the negotiating table.“Our culture, our language, is central to our identity, and it is important to exclude that from the negotiation table,” said Fréchette in a news conference, according to CNN newsgathering partner CBC News.“Even though we are threatened with different tariffs, it won’t change. We will stay the way we are.”The-CNN-Wire™ & © 2026 Cable News Network, Inc., a Warner Bros. Discovery Company. All rights reserved.
Read Next Story