WASHINGTON (AP) — The White House asserted to Congress in a letter Friday that hostilities with Iran have "terminated" despite the continued presence of U.S. armed forces in the region.

The message from President Donald Trump effectively skirts a May 1 legal deadline to gain approval from members of Congress to continue the war with Iran. That deadline was already set to pass without action from Republican lawmakers who are deferring to the president.

READ MORE: 4 takeaways from Hegseth's hearings on historic defense budget request, Iran war

The letter brings into stark relief the bold but legally questionable assertion of presidential power at the heart of Trump's war, which he began without congressional approval two months ago.

"The hostilities that began on February 28, 2026, have terminated," Trump wrote House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., and Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, the Senate president pro tempore.

Yet he also made it clear in the letter that the war may be far from over.

"Despite the success of United States operations against the Iranian regime and continued efforts to secure a lasting peace, the threat posed by Iran to the United States and our Armed Forces remains significant," the Republican president said.

Under the War Powers Resolution of 1973, Congress must declare war or authorize the use of force within 60 days — Friday was the deadline — or within 90 days if the president asks for an extension. This Congress made no attempt at enforcing that requirement, leaving town Thursday for a week after the Senate rejected a Democratic attempt to halt the war for a sixth time.

READ MORE: Congress hasn't officially declared war since WWII. Here's how presidential war powers have played out since then

Some GOP senators are growing uneasy about the war's timeline, which Trump initially said would last a few weeks. But Trump's letter showed how the president continues to forego congressional approval. It contends the deadlines set by the law do not apply because the war in Iran effectively ended when a shaky ceasefire began in early April.

The Republican debate over the war

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said Thursday he did not plan on a vote to authorize force in Iran or otherwise weigh in.

"I'm listening carefully to what the members of our conference are saying, and at this point I don't see that," Thune said.

The reluctance to defy Trump on the war comes at a politically perilous time for Republicans, with public frustration mounting both over the conflict and its impact on gas prices. Still, most GOP lawmakers say they are supportive of Trump's wartime leadership or are at least willing to give him more time amid the fragile ceasefire.

Sen. Kevin Cramer, R-N.D., said he would vote for an authorization of war if Trump asked for it. But Cramer questioned whether the resolution passed during the Vietnam War era, as a way for Congress to claw back its power, was constitutional.

"Our founders created a really strong executive, like it or not like it," Cramer said.

Some GOP senators did make it clear that they eventually want Congress to have a say.

Indiana Sen. Todd Young said in a statement that lawmakers "must ensure that the people, through their elected representatives, weigh in on whether to send our military into combat."

He added that since the Trump administration is stating that "the Iran conflict has ceased, there should be no hostilities moving forward," and that if the conflict resumes, he expects the White House to work with Congress to pass an authorization for use of military force.

Some Republicans signal they want a vote

A handful of GOP senators have said for weeks that Congress should assert its authority over the war at some point. One of those, Maine's Susan Collins, voted for the first time with Democrats on Thursday to halt the war. She said in a statement that she wants to see a defined strategy for bringing the conflict to a close.

"The president's authority as commander in chief is not without limits," Collins said, adding that the 60-day deadline is "not a suggestion, it is a requirement."

In addition to Collins and Young, Republican Sens. John Curtis of Utah, Thom Tillis of North Carolina, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Josh Hawley of Missouri, among others, have said they would eventually like to see a vote.

Curtis said he would not support continued funding for the war until Congress votes to authorize it.

"It is time for decision-making from both the administration and from Congress — and that can happen in league with one another, not in conflict," Curtis said.

Thune suggested the White House step up its outreach to lawmakers with briefings and hearings if it wants continued support from Capitol Hill.

"Obviously, getting readouts from our military leadership on a somewhat regular basis, I think, will be helpful in terms of shaping the views of our members about how comfortable they are with everything that's happening there, and the direction headed forward," Thune said.

Administration argues the deadline doesn't apply

With the 60-day window under the War Powers Resolution expiring Friday, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said during a congressional hearing Thursday, "We are in a ceasefire right now, which our understanding means, the 60-day clock pauses or stops."

The administration is making that argument even though Iran maintains its chokehold on the Strait of Hormuz and the U.S. Navy is maintaining a blockade to prevent Iran's oil tankers from getting out to sea.

Trump on Friday echoed Hegseth's argument, and stressed that other presidents had similarly not sought congressional approval as laid out under the 1973 law.

"Every other president considered it totally unconstitutional, and we agree with that," Trump said at the White House as he departed for Florida.

Democrats scoffed at the suggestion that May 1 was not the real deadline.

Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., said on social media, "There's no pause button in the Constitution, or the War Powers Act. We're at war. We've been at war for 60 days. The blockade alone is a continuing act of war."

The development came as little surprise to at least one House Democrat who oversees the military.

Washington Rep. Adam Smith, the ranking Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee, told The Associated Press: "Is the expectation that the Trump administration is going to follow the law? I do not have that expectation."