{"version":"1.0","type":"rich","provider_name":"Acast","provider_url":"https://acast.com","height":250,"width":700,"html":"<iframe src=\"https://embed.acast.com/$/60518a52f69aa815d2dba41c/6a287f346642088a10d94da5?\" frameBorder=\"0\" width=\"700\" height=\"250\"></iframe>","title":"Lawfare Daily: Congressional Resolutions to End the War in Iran","description":"<p>On today's podcast, Executive Editor Natalie Orpett speaks with Senior Editor Scott R. Anderson about what Congress can do to direct the president to end the war in Iran. Scott's recent article in <em>Lawfare</em>, “<a href=\"https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/what-congressional-resolutions-mean-for-the-war-in-iran\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\" target=\"_blank\">What Congressional Resolutions Mean for the War in Iran</a>,” explained why a likely presidential veto of a War Powers Resolution is not the end of the story. The War Powers Resolution gives Congress other tools—including some procedural tricks—that could have a meaningful influence on ending the war. They talk about Scott's article, why he thinks a concurrent resolution is the best option, and how congressional action may be more than just political messaging—it could have real legal significance.</p><p>To receive ad-free podcasts, become a <em>Lawfare </em>Material Supporter at <a href=\"http://www.patreon.com/lawfare\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\" target=\"_blank\">www.patreon.com/lawfare</a>. You can also support <em>Lawfare </em>by making a one-time donation at <a href=\"https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\" target=\"_blank\">https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute</a>.</p>","author_name":"The Lawfare Institute"}