The President may not waive the application of legal sanctions against Iran, suspend, reduce, divert or restrict them, or refrain from applying sanctions in accordance with an agreement before and during the postponement period and during the period of revision of Congress. On 14 July 2015, the P5+1 or E3/EU+3, which includes the United States, the United Kingdom, China, France, Germany, the Russian Federation and the European Union, concluded a historic agreement with the Islamic Republic of Iran on the development of its nuclear programme. [1] The deal, officially known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), limits Iran`s nuclear program in exchange for facilitating economic sanctions. [2] The legislation introduced by Congress on the nuclear deal and sanctions against Iran is summarized below. As I have said in previous interventions, the “comprehensive solution” that could be found in June would be a non-binding agreement (in other words, international law would not be binding). The Obama administration appears to intend to use the comprehensive solution as the basis for a Security Council resolution that would lift UN sanctions against Iran. The president would also exercise his power, granted by Congress, to suspend or lift U.S. sanctions. These US sanctions are at the heart of INARA. As important as Iran`s support for international terrorism is, it has never been an element in negotiations over its nuclear program.

This bill would announce to the world that the United States is not meeting its own commitments, even if Iran is meeting all of its obligations under a nuclear deal. Senator Corker did not mention this provision in his office`s summary of his bill. It seems to me that this is a more reasonable position for Congress than I originally thought. Yes, the bill gives Congress, during the review period, the power to legislate — a “joint resolution” — that would lift the president`s current power to waive sanctions at the end of the 60 days. And yes, this post-INARA legislation, depending on the nature of the Iran deal, could prevent the U.S. from complying with the deal. But Congress would have that power – which would require a more continuous vote of super-majorities in both chambers – whether or not it passes inara first. I understand why the president does not want Congress to announce in legislation its intention to review the Iran deal after the negotiations. But McDonough`s letter does not deny that Congress has the final say on congressional sanctions, and everyone knows that Congress will get involved, whether or not it passes the Corker Bill. MP Peter Roskam (ILL) introduced on September 8, 2015 H Res _ – A Question of House Of Privilege.

The legislation reaffirmed the right to re-examine all materials related to the Iran nuclear deal and asked Congress not to recognize the Congressional review period until two side agreements between the International Atomic Energy Agency and Iran have not been introduced. [9] On September 9, 2015, MPs introduced Mike Pompeo (R-Kan) and Lee Zeldin (R-N.Y.) H Res 411 – Finding that the President failed to comply with Section 2 of the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act of 2015. . .