Trump Supports Russian Sanctions Bill, Faces Procedural Challenges, Graham Says

Congress Deadlocked Over Russia Sanctions Package Amid Ukraine Peace Efforts

Congress stands at a critical juncture as it considers implementing severe sanctions against Russia, though procedural disagreements threaten to derail the bipartisan effort aimed at crippling the Kremlin’s war machine.

Republican Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Democratic Senator Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut have been spearheading legislation that would target Russia and its energy trade partners. Their package, which has garnered over 80 co-sponsors in the Senate, has experienced starts and stops over recent months as President Donald Trump’s administration works toward brokering a peace deal between Russia and Ukraine.

The president now appears ready to advance the sanctions package. According to Graham, Trump instructed Senate Majority Leader John Thune during a golf outing last weekend to “Move the bill.”

“I think it’s very important we not screw this up,” Graham emphasized. “If you want [Russian President Vladimir] Putin at the table, there will be no successful 28-point plan or 12-point plan unless Putin believes that we’re going to continue to support Ukraine militarily and that we’re going to come after people who buy cheap Russian oil.”

Graham stressed the strategic importance of congressional action, adding: “It’s important that the Congress pass this bill to give leverage to the president as he tries to negotiate with Putin.”

While specific changes to the legislation remain under wraps, a White House official told Fox News Digital that both Congress and the administration are collaborating to ensure the bill advances “the President’s foreign policy objectives and authorities.”

“The Constitution vests the president with the authority to conduct diplomacy with foreign nations,” the official stated. “The current bipartisan sanctions legislation provides new sanctions authorities for the president to conduct foreign diplomacy.”

Despite the apparent agreement on substance, procedural hurdles have emerged regarding which chamber should originate the legislation. Senator Thune suggested the House should initiate the process because it’s a revenue measure, which typically begins in the lower chamber.

“We had one available to us in the Senate. We could do it here,” Thune said. “But I think, too, if you want to expedite movement in terms of getting it on the president’s desk, it’s probably quicker if it comes out of the House, comes over to us, to take it up and process it on the floor.”

This stance caught House Speaker Mike Johnson by surprise. The Louisiana Republican told Fox News Digital he had understood from conversations with Thune that the legislation would originate in the Senate before moving to the House.

Johnson warned that starting in the House would create “a much more laborious, lengthy process,” noting the bill would need to navigate through seven different committees of jurisdiction. “The reason is because it’s a faster track to get it done,” Johnson explained about his preference for Senate initiation. “Even if I can convince some of the chairmen to waive jurisdiction, not all of them will.”

The Senate faces its own procedural obstacles. The original version of the bill has remained in the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs since April. It would need committee consideration, discharge, and floor debate—with potential for blockage at any step.

Despite these challenges, both Graham and Blumenthal have been modifying the legislation behind the scenes to align with White House priorities. While Blumenthal declined to share specifics about the changes, he noted that Trump’s recent move to sanction two major Russian oil companies, which took effect Friday, was “a good start.”

“I think we’re waiting to finalize the bill and see what the president thinks about it,” Blumenthal said. “And, obviously, he’s imposed sanctions already on India, on two major Russian oil companies, so he’s in the right frame of mind.”

The sanctions debate occurs against the backdrop of Trump’s efforts to negotiate an end to the Russia-Ukraine conflict, with the administration attempting to balance diplomatic initiatives with pressure on Moscow. How quickly Congress can resolve its procedural differences will likely determine whether this legislation becomes a meaningful tool in the administration’s diplomatic approach toward Russia.