Opinion>Opinions - Lindsey's Lens

The views expressed by contributors are their own and not the view of The Hill

Hegseth hearing ignites battle over who holds the power to wage war

Comments:

by Lindsey Granger, opinion contributor - 05/01/26 12:41 PM ET

Comments:

Link copied

by Lindsey Granger, opinion contributor - 05/01/26 12:41 PM ET

Comments:

Link copied

NOW PLAYING

We’ve now watched Pete Hegseth face two straight days of questioning on Capitol Hill, and what stands out isn’t just the tension, it’s the disconnect. Because at the center of all of this is a very simple question: who decides when America goes to war and how long we stay there?

Hegseth started the hearing like this yesterday: “The biggest adversary we face at this point are the reckless naysayers and defeatist words of congressional Democrats and some Republicans. Deficits from the cheap seats who two months in seek to undermine the incredible efforts that have been undertaken”

That kind of language might rally a base, but it doesn’t answer the legal reality. Under the War Powers Resolution, a president has 60 days to either get congressional approval for military action or stop.

That deadline is now here. Literally today.

But instead of clarity, we’re getting reinterpretation. Hegseth argues that because fighting has paused, the clock pauses too. The problem? The law doesn’t say that. And Democrats like Tim Kaine are openly saying they don’t believe that argument holds up.

This is about precedent. If a pause in fighting resets the clock, then what’s to stop any administration from stretching a conflict indefinitely without Congress ever weighing in?

At the same time, there’s another concern bubbling under the surface — are we actually prepared for the long haul? Hegseth seems to think so.

“The expenditures that we’ve seen under this administration, we can account for them, and we ensure that other plans are well taken care of. So on the munitions front, we’re in really good shape, but we need to accelerate.”

That’s reassuring on its face. But reporting suggests the U.S. has already burned through significant high-end weapons, pulling resources from other regions. Lawmakers are asking a fair question: are we stretching ourselves thin?

And then there’s the bigger strategic picture, because this isn’t just about Iran. It’s about global stability. Tensions with Germany are rising. Europe and the U.S. are not aligned. And Iran is now openly threatening “long and painful strikes” if attacks on its country resume.

So while officials say talks are progressing behind closed doors, publicly, it looks like a stalemate with a ticking clock.

On Wednesday we couldn’t even get a clear answer from Hegseth on why we went to war if the country’s nuclear capabilities were “obliterated” during Operation Midnight Hammer. And that brings me to what I think is the real issue here.

The American people and Congress should have a voice in this war. Timelines should not be endlessly flexible, definitions of laws should not become subjective, and accountability should not become optional.

Lindsey Granger is a NewsNation contributor and co-host of The Hill’s commentary show “Rising.” This column is an edited transcription of her on-air commentary.

Add as preferred source on Google