The ink on the memo was barely dry when the lawyers started circling. This week, reports surfaced that the Trump administration quietly signed an agreement with Iran — something between a handshake and a treaty. The White House calls it a “memorandum of understanding.” Critics call it an end-run around Congress.
At the heart of the fight is a 2015 law, the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act (INARA), passed with overwhelming bipartisan support. It requires the president to submit any nuclear deal with Iran to Congress for a 60-day review. The law was designed to ensure that no White House could cut a secret deal with Tehran. But does a memorandum count?
The Law They Forgot About
INARA was born in a different era — back when Barack Obama was negotiating the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, and Republicans were screaming for oversight. The law passed 98-1 in the Senate. Its language is broad: “any agreement with Iran that relates to the nuclear program” must be submitted. Not just treaties. Not just formal accords. Any agreement.
That’s the weapon Democrats are now sharpening. Senator Chris Van Hollen, a Maryland Democrat, fired off a letter to the State Department this week demanding the text of the memo. “The law is clear,” he told reporters. “If this is about Iran’s nuclear program, it goes to Congress. Full stop.”
The administration hasn’t said much. State Department spokespeople offered the usual cocktail of non-denials: “We are reviewing the legal requirements.” “The president has broad authority in foreign affairs.” It’s the diplomatic equivalent of “no comment.”
The law is clear. If this is about Iran’s nuclear program, it goes to Congress. Full stop.
What’s in the Memo?
No one knows for sure. Details are scarce. But rumors suggest it involves a temporary freeze on Iranian enrichment in exchange for sanctions relief — a mini-deal meant to buy time. If that’s true, it sounds an awful lot like the 2015 deal that Trump himself called “the worst deal ever” and tore up in 2018.
The irony is thick enough to cut. Trump spent four years dismantling Obama’s Iran deal, calling it a giveaway to terrorists. Now he’s reportedly negotiating a similar arrangement. The difference? This one is being done in the dark.
Congressional aides say they’ve been stonewalled. Requests for briefings go unanswered. The memo hasn’t been shared with the relevant committees. “We’re being treated like mushrooms — kept in the dark and fed you-know-what,” one staffer told me, not for attribution.
Can Trump Just Ignore the Law?
Legally, it’s not that simple. INARA includes a mechanism: if the president doesn’t submit an agreement, any member of Congress can file a “question of compliance” with the comptroller general. The comptroller general then decides whether the agreement falls under the law. If yes, the president has five days to submit it — or face a lawsuit.
But here’s the rub: the comptroller general is a creature of Congress, not the courts. And enforcement would ultimately land in federal court, where judges are historically reluctant to interfere with presidential foreign policy. The Supreme Court has repeatedly given the executive wide latitude in diplomacy. In 2015, the Court refused to intervene in a similar dispute over the Iran deal itself.
Still, the political cost of defiance is real. If the administration is caught hiding the memo, it fuels the narrative that Trump is running a shadow foreign policy. That plays right into the hands of his critics — and gives Democrats a cudgel for the upcoming midterms.
What Precedent Exists?
In 2020, the Trump administration argued that a UN Security Council resolution on Iran didn’t need congressional approval. The courts kicked that can down the road. But that was about a UN vote, not a bilateral agreement. INARA was written specifically to cover bilateral deals — the kind the president can sign without a treaty.
Then there’s the example of the “Six-Power Agreement” from 2004, when the Bush administration negotiated a nuclear freeze with Iran. That was never submitted to Congress. No one sued. But the political climate then was different — bipartisanship on Iran, though frayed, still existed.
Now, the climate is toxic. Trump’s own party is split: some hawks want confrontation with Iran, others are tired of endless wars. Democrats smell blood. The memo could become the next political firestorm — unless the White House releases it voluntarily.
The Clock Is Ticking
If the memo is indeed a binding agreement, the 60-day clock started ticking the moment it was signed. That means Congress would have until late August to review it — and potentially vote to disapprove. But lawmakers can’t review what they don’t have.
Senate Foreign Relations Committee chair Bob Menendez, a Democrat, has demanded the text. So has ranking Republican Jim Risch. Bipartisan pressure is mounting. “This isn’t about party,” Risch said this week. “It’s about the rule of law.” Not everyone buys that — Risch voted against the 2015 deal — but for now, the optics are on their side.
If the administration continues to stonewall, expect a lawsuit. Expect hearings. Expect leaks. In Washington, there are no secrets, only stories waiting to be told.
And here’s the question that keeps me up: Why is Trump — who loves to brag about tearing up the Iran deal — now quietly negotiating with the same regime? The answer might be simpler than it seems: he needs a win. Iran is closer to a bomb than ever. Sanctions aren’t working. The clock is ticking on his own legacy.
But if he thought he could do it without telling Congress, he miscalculated. The law doesn’t care about his reelection.
