Key takeaways
- Democrats are favored to win the House in the November 3, 2026 midterms, according to polls and forecasts, and plan oversight, subpoenas, and spending fights from “Day One"
- Foreign policy and national security are the areas where presidents face the fewest constitutional constraints, so a Democratic House has limited tools to change Trump’s course on Iran or Russia
- Ian Bremmer of Eurasia Group says the Iran war may not be subject to meaningful oversight, and that “we’ve already passed peak Trump” globally
- Presidents with narrowing domestic options have turned abroad before, including Richard Nixon in 1974 and John Tyler in 1845
With control of the House likely to flip, according to polls and forecasts, Democrats have said they are ready to start targeting President Donald Trump on “Day One,” tying up his domestic agenda in investigations and stalling tactics. Their aim, in short, will be to force the president into a position he has reportedly told aides he is determined to avoid: that of a lame duck whose influence wanes and ability to control the national agenda stalls.
A lame duck president is not powerless, however. And foreign policy and national security – areas where the White House typically is less constrained constitutionally – remain potential bastions of executive branch freedom of maneuver.
“It’s hard to overturn foreign policy as the Congress,” Ian Bremmer, founder of the Eurasia Group political risk consultancy, told the One Decision podcast in October. Even the Iran war, according to Bremmer, may not be subject to meaningful oversight. “I’m not sure that [the course of the war] can change much just because Democrats are in the House and Senate.” Bremmer added, “It’s not as if Trump has exhibited an awful lot of personal restraint or willingness to listen to advisors this time around compared to his first term.”
Trump would not be the first president to turn abroad as his domestic options narrow. History offers examples of other presidents who followed a similar course, with dramatic and sometimes disastrous results.
How Could Democrats Constrain Trump If They Win the House?
Assuming that they establish majority control of the House in next week’s midterm elections, Democrats would be positioned to constrain the White House in several ways, including using subpoena and oversight powers to investigate Trump, his son-in-law Jared Kushner, and members of his administration.
Representatives Yassamin Ansari, a Democrat, and Thomas Massie, a Republican, have already filed articles of impeachment against Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth. Representative Robert Garcia, who is in line to chair the Oversight Committee, says Democrats are also ready to subpoena Attorney General Todd Blanche, whom they accuse of politicizing the Justice Department. Democrats would have leverage over spending, too, and could refuse to pass a Pentagon budget, for example, unless Trump commits to continuing support for Ukraine.
Policies, as well as personnel, will be in the crosshairs, likely starting with Trump’s aggressive – and increasingly unpopular – measures on immigration. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries have demanded ten “guardrails” on ICE’s operations, including a mask ban, visible identification, body cameras, and judicial warrants for many immigration-related arrests. Jeffries has also vowed to undo the Medicaid cuts from Trump’s 2025 One Big Beautiful Bill Act, including work requirements due to take effect by January 1, 2027, and to restore enhanced ACA subsidies.
Could Trump Strike Iran Again After the Midterms?
According to multiple reports, the Pentagon has drawn up plans for new strikes on Iran, and the president is weighing attacks after the November elections. In this case, Trump may be his own best historical antecedent. A week after losing the 2020 election, he asked top advisers for options to strike Iran’s Natanz nuclear site and was only talked out of it by then-Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and General Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff at the time, who warned the attack could spark a broad regional conflict in the president’s final weeks in office.
Now, Trump faces far fewer such checks inside his administration. The U.S. is also already at war with Iran and Hegseth, the Pentagon’s chief, faces impeachment articles in part over his handling of the conflict. A Republican defeat in the midterms, some analysts fear, could also make renewed strikes on Iran more tempting, because Trump could calculate that he has little left to lose politically.
“The best scenario is likely that after the midterms he engages in some additional strikes to show that he can, including some of the ballistic missiles and drone stockpiles and maybe some of the nuclear targets like Pickaxe Mountain,” Bremmer said.
Why Is Trump Making Energy Deals With Russia?
Weeks before the midterms, Trump struck a deal with Vladimir Putin for Russian diesel, in a bid to ease rising fuel prices caused largely by the US-Israeli war with Iran, reversing years of sanctions pressure on Moscow. Days later, the president waived most of a Russia sanctions law he had signed just a month earlier meant to choke off the country’s energy revenues. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has warned that Trump may also pursue natural gas deals with Russia, which could in turn strengthen Moscow’s hand in the war in Ukraine.
Trump would not be the first embattled president to turn to energy deals abroad. In June 1974, with Watergate closing in, Richard Nixon flew to the Middle East on a trip critics derided as “impeachment diplomacy,” and pledged to sell nuclear reactors and fuel to Egypt and Israel. Neither country ever got the reactors. The plan for Israel was all but gone by the end of the decade, and Egypt’s first nuclear power plant is now being built by Russia. Nixon resigned less than two months after his trip.
Could Trump Try to Expand U.S. Territory? The John Tyler Precedent
Trump has backed off his push to acquire Greenland — for now — and Denmark has ruled out negotiating the island’s cession. But a president who never faces voters again can also try to expand the nation’s borders using strong-arm tactics or procedural maneuvering.
In April 1844, the nation’s 10th president, John Tyler, submitted a treaty to the Senate to annex Texas, which had declared independence from Mexico eight years earlier. The effort failed, 35–16, far short of the two-thirds required to pass. Tyler responded by pushing a joint resolution to annex the republic through both chambers of Congress, where it needed only simple majorities, and signed it three days before leaving office. Then, on his last full day, he sent the Texans an offer of immediate annexation, and their republic joined the Union as the 28th state that December. Not long after, the U.S. declared war on Mexico, which still claimed Texas as its own, and eventually forced Mexico to cede 55 percent of its territory, including California.
Lame-duck foreign policy: three precedents
| President | Year | Foreign policy move | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|
| Donald Trump | November 2020 | Asked advisers for options to strike Iran’s Natanz nuclear site | Talked out of it by Pompeo and Milley |
| Richard Nixon | June 1974 | Pledged nuclear reactors and fuel to Egypt and Israel | Neither country got reactors; Nixon resigned less than two months later |
| John Tyler | 1844–45 | Annexed Texas via joint resolution after a failed treaty | Texas became the 28th state; war with Mexico followed |
Has Trump Passed His Peak Influence Abroad?
If Democrats are unable to constrain Trump’s foreign actions, the most significant obstacle to his own international adventurism may be his record of setbacks. Trump impressed even his critics with the speed and volume of his actions in the early days of his second term – what his former advisor Steve Bannon refers to as “muzzle velocity.” But friction has steadily been building up, abroad as well as at home, and even radical and unexpected US actions may no longer land with their former force.
“He tried to force the Chinese to capitulate on tariffs and failed,” Bremmer noted. “He certainly tried to get his way with the Europeans on Greenland. He failed, backed down. He's tried to get the Iranians out with this big war of choice. He's failed.”
“Globally,” Bremmer assessed, “we've already passed peak Trump.”
