Controversy Over US-Iran MOU: Is Trump Required to Submit It to Congress?

Several lawmakers and pro-Israel organizations have urged President Donald Trump to submit the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) aimed at ending the US-Israel war with Iran to Congress for review. They cite the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act (INARA) as a precedent.

Enacted in 2015 under former President Barack Obama, INARA requires that any agreement with Iran related to its nuclear program be submitted to Congress for review and potential rejection by vote. The law was in effect during the Obama administration's negotiations of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) with Iran and remains in force today.

What Does INARA Say?

INARA sets requirements for any agreement between the US and Iran “relating to the nuclear program of Iran,” regardless of its “form” or legal binding nature. Before its passage, the law was supported by JCPOA opponents from both parties. The JCPOA subsequently complied with the law's provisions.

Under the law, the president must submit the text of any agreement with Iran to Congress within five days, along with related documents. This triggers a 30-day review period. During that time, lawmakers can pass a joint resolution of disapproval to nullify the agreement.

However, the resolution of disapproval is subject to a presidential veto. Overriding a veto requires a two-thirds majority vote in both chambers. While Congress reviews the agreement, the president “may not waive, suspend, reduce, provide relief from, or otherwise limit the application of statutory sanctions with respect to Iran.” These provisions could limit the MOU, as it includes sanctions relief for Iran.

Does INARA Apply to the MOU?

President Trump has suggested he might send the US-Iran MOU to Congress, telling reporters, “I like that idea. I mean, who wouldn't approve it?” But his administration has yet to do so. Officials have not clearly stated whether the MOU must comply with the law.

The MOU this week opens the Strait of Hormuz, lifts the US blockade of Iranian ports, and halts fighting on all fronts, including Lebanon. It also immediately removes US sanctions on Iran's fossil fuel sector while initiating negotiations on the future of Iran's nuclear program. As part of the deal, both nations agreed to maintain nuclear “status quo” during ongoing talks, and Iran committed to diluting high-enriched uranium “on-site,” with details to be determined later.

Legal experts argue the MOU falls under INARA. Tess Bridgeman, a former Obama White House legal adviser, wrote that the law applies to “this new MOU and any final agreement that may be negotiated in the coming months.” However, she suggested repealing INARA to avoid hindering diplomatic progress. Jack Goldsmith, a Harvard Law professor and fellow at the conservative American Enterprise Institute, also believes the MOU should trigger INARA's review process. He noted that Trump's pledge of “immediate” oil sanctions relief appears to violate INARA: “I don't think the president has domestic legal authority to grant these waivers.” Still, he predicted that neither Congress nor the judiciary would confront Trump over the issue.

Will Trump Comply with the Law?

Trump’s second term has been marked by broad interpretations of presidential power. His administration has ignored the US constitutional provision that only Congress has the power to declare war. Trump claimed Iran posed an “imminent threat” to the US, enabling him to launch defensive attacks without congressional approval. Officials also argued that the president is not bound by the legal requirement to obtain congressional authorization within 60 days of launching attacks. The war, which began on February 28, has lasted nearly three and a half months.

In an interview with Axios, Trump said the war taught him that there are “no limits” on presidential power. It remains unclear if he will change course and accept congressional cooperation under INARA.

Renewed Concerns Over Congressional Oversight?

Pro-Israel groups like JINSA and AIPAC have called on Congress to intervene in the agreement. Since the war began, JINSA defended Trump's “imminent threat” claim regarding Iran and urged Congress to pass an Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) to bolster his actions. However, Congress has repeatedly failed to reassert its authority to take the US to war.

Since February, several war powers resolutions have been introduced to block US military action against Iran. Initially, some AIPAC-backed Democrats broke party discipline to oppose such efforts. Some later changed their stance, but no bill has passed Congress with enough votes to override a Trump veto. Meanwhile, Republican lawmakers ignored the May 60-day deadline requiring Trump to seek congressional approval for continued military operations.

Democratic Senator Chris Van Hollen criticized Republican support for INARA as hypocritical: “Republican senators who were AWOL from their constitutional duty around STARTING the war against Iran are suddenly demanding Congress play a role in STOPPING the war. That's some war hawkery.”