U.S. Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-D. he said on Tuesday, June 16, 2026, as he heard that the president’s agreement with Iran set a 60-day framework for negotiators to reach an agreement on more details. In this photo, Thune speaks to reporters on Capitol Hill, September 19, 2025. (Photo by Jennifer Shutt/States Newsroom)
WASHINGTON – U.S. senators from both political parties said Tuesday that they had not yet seen the text of the agreement that Trump administration officials reached over the weekend to end the war in Iran, although several indicated that any final agreement would require their approval.
Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said administration officials have indicated they expect to share the text of the memorandum of understanding with lawmakers, although he did not know when.
“I hope it happens sooner rather than later,” he said. “But, you know, apparently it doesn’t look like they’re going to make it public until the end of the week. So we’ll see.”
Thune said he had heard that the agreement establishes a 60-day framework for negotiators to reach an agreement on more details, including on Iran’s nuclear ambitions.
“I think ultimately the goal is to make sure Iran ends its nuclear program, and any financial incentives available to it should depend on that,” he said. “But we’ll see when we know more.”
President Donald Trump, speaking at the G7 convention in Europe, said he might hold a news conference in “a few days” to release the text of the memorandum of understanding and appeared ready for a congressional vote.
“I would like to send this to Congress saying you should not approve this. And I will make sure it is approved. Whatever I say, they want to do the opposite,” he said. – They’re not doing very well, by the way.
North Dakota Republican Sen. John Hoeven said he thinks the plan is to vote to approve the Iran deal at some point.
“I think any time Congress ratifies something, it ensures longevity,” Hoeven said. “You can’t have the next president come in and change it with an executive order. So I think that’s a benefit. I think it helps strengthen it.”
Hoeven said he had not heard from administration officials why they did not share the text of the memorandum of understanding with senators, even in secret. But he said he was more focused on U.S. enforcement of the agreements on Iran’s nuclear program in the longer term.
“The real problem is that we have something that we can enforce, and that is difficult with Iran because they do not honor any agreement,” Hoeven said.
Is the agreement a treaty?
Louisiana Republican Senator Bill Cassidy said he believed the Iran deal would constitute a treaty and would be subject to Senate confirmation.
“It sounds like a treaty,” he said. “And if it’s a treaty, it certainly looks like it.”
This would require forceful bipartisanship because the Constitution establishes a two-thirds threshold for the Senate to approve a treaty.
Cassidy added that it appears the administration will need the Israeli government – which initiated the attack on Iran along with the United States – to end the war in Lebanon in order to reach a final agreement with Iran in the next two months.
“To make an agreement, you need two parties. In this case, maybe three, maybe four, because you have Hezbollah and Israel,” Cassidy said, referring to the powerful Lebanese political party and militant group opposed to Israel. “Hezbollah can just stir up trouble with impunity if it wants, under certain conditions. So tell me it takes two to dance, and now it takes four to dance. Can you do it in 60 days? I don’t know.”
North Carolina Republican Senator Thom Tillis said the administration must be as lucid as possible about the content of the memorandum of understanding with Iran.
“There must be at least maximum transparency,” he said.
Tillis said Senate approval of the final deal “makes sense,” arguing that President Barack Obama made a mistake by not requiring lawmakers to ratify the deal his administration struck with Iran in 2015. The agreement was called the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).
“I have said many times that Obama made a mistake by not making every effort to bring it to the level of a treaty, and I believe we should do so in this case,” he said. “Otherwise it will only last two and a half years.”
Tillis said he was not concerned that Congress had not yet received the text of the memorandum of understanding, but it was imperative that the administration release the documents.
“Trust, but verify,” he said.
“Basically a surrender”
Connecticut Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy said he “doubts” the memorandum of understanding is actually real, but if it is, lawmakers should expect “side agreements” that the administration may not share.
“If what we report is true, these are Iran’s terms. I mean, it’s basically a surrender. But I think that’s the only game we can play at this point,” he said. “We have to end this war and stop wasting money, stop killing Americans and civilians and stop raising prices. It’s a bad deal, but he won’t get a better deal. So we just have to accept the humiliation. But I don’t even know if it’s true.”
West Virginia Republican Sen. Shelley Moore Capito said lawmakers need to read the memorandum of understanding so she and others can “express our opinions.”
“But right now we can’t because it’s not fully available yet,” she said.
Senate Intelligence Committee ranking member Mark Warner, R-Va., said he had not seen the text of the memorandum or been briefed on it by administration officials. But he believes the administration must present it to lawmakers within five days, as required by the 2015 law.
“I’m afraid the details won’t be as good as the president is making it out to be,” Warner said.
Legal requirements
Congress approved legislation in 2015, which requires each presidential administration to present the text of an agreement on Iran’s nuclear program within five days. These documents do not have to be sent to every lawmaker, but should go to congressional leaders and the eight relevant committees.
This delegation establishes a 30-day review period for the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and the House Foreign Affairs Committee to conduct hearings and briefings.
The act allowed Congress to approve a joint resolution expressing disapproval of any nuclear deal with Iran. The House and Senate would likely need the support of at least two-thirds of members to override Trump’s likely veto.
Congress overriding the president’s veto of the disapproval resolution would prevent the Trump administration from lifting sanctions on Iran, although this seems an unlikely scenario given that both chambers are controlled by Republicans.
AND report of the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service says a joint resolution of disapproval that goes into effect “would not invalidate the agreement itself but would only affect the ability to ease presidential sanctions against Iran; nevertheless, preventing the President from granting such relief would almost certainly result in Iran terminating the agreement.”
The bill, officially titled the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act of 2015, also clears the way for Congress to approve a joint resolution of approval.
The CRS report concluded that “once enacted, this would allow the President to waive sanctions, apparently even if the review period has not yet expired.”
Congress taking no action during the 30-day review period would allow the administration to begin easing sanctions immediately after that deadline.
