Live updates: Leavitt holds press briefing; House OKs war powers resolution

The New York Times (US)Independent🔒Center3 hr. ago

The U.S. House of Representatives again voted against President Donald Trump's actions in the conflict with Iran, with a small number of Republican lawmakers joining Democratic members to support a resolution demanding presidential authorization for military action. This marks the second instance where bipartisan opposition has been expressed regarding the administration's handling of the war powers related to Iran. The vote highlights ongoing tensions between the executive branch and Congress over military engagement, particularly concerning the scope of presidential authority. While the exact implications of the vote remain unclear, it signals continued legislative scrutiny of the administration’s foreign policy decisions.

Bias read (Center): The article presents a factual account of a congressional vote without overtly endorsing or criticizing either side. It reports on bipartisan opposition to the president's actions, which suggests a balanced approach to the issue. There is no clear ideological slant in the framing of the event or the

CBS News (US)IndependentProgressive3 hr. ago

The U.S. House of Representatives voted to direct President Trump to end hostilities with Iran, passing a war powers resolution introduced by Democratic Rep. Pramila Jayapal. The resolution requires the president to cease using U.S. armed forces against Iran without congressional approval. Four Republican lawmakers defied their party to support the measure, citing constitutional concerns and the escalating costs of the war. The vote comes amid rising tensions and casualties, with Trump claiming military action resumed after a reported ceasefire. The resolution aligns with the War Powers Resolution of 1973, which mandates congressional oversight of military actions.

Bias read (Progressive): The article frames the resolution as a necessary check on executive power, emphasizing congressional authority and criticizing Trump's handling of the conflict. While the resolution itself is bipartisan in outcome, the emphasis on constitutional checks and the critique of Trump's stance leans left.

The HillIndependentCenter3 hr. ago

President Trump has threatened to escalate the war with Iran, despite growing skepticism among lawmakers about his ability to achieve military success. The House narrowly passed a Democratic-led war powers resolution with support from four Republicans, while the Senate is set to consider a similar measure. Meanwhile, Iran-backed Houthis in Yemen attacked two oil tankers in the Red Sea, escalating regional tensions. Other developments include potential challenges to the confirmation of Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche and Dr. Erica Schwartz's nomination for CDC director. The Energy Department also announced a controversial nuclear cooperation agreement with Saudi Arabia, drawing criticism. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt held a press briefing, and Trump planned to address the Ratepayer Protection Pledge regarding U.S. AI companies' energy costs.

Bias read (Center): The article presents a balanced overview of multiple political developments without overtly favoring any particular side. It reports on bipartisan actions in Congress, conflicting views on Trump's foreign policy, and various administrative nominations, maintaining neutrality in framing.

Bloomberg NewsIndependent🔒Center5 hr. ago

On July 23, 2026, the U.S. House of Representatives passed a resolution urging President Donald Trump to end the ongoing conflict with Iran for the second time. The resolution relies on the War Powers Act, which has been a subject of legal debate regarding its effectiveness in curbing presidential military actions. While the vote does not carry immediate legal force, it highlights growing dissatisfaction with the war and concerns within the Republican Party about potential electoral repercussions in the upcoming midterm elections. Several Republican members of Congress defied their party leadership to support the measure, indicating internal divisions over the issue.

Bias read (Center): The article presents the event factually, noting both the symbolic nature of the resolution and the internal political dynamics within the Republican Party. It avoids overtly favoring either side, focusing on the procedural and political implications rather than taking a stance on the conflict or on