President Trump signed into law a broad sanctions package targeting Russia's economy and extending pressure on Iran, a bill that bears the name of the late Sen. Lindsey Graham and passed both chambers with large bipartisan margins.
The legislation, formally titled the Lindsey O. Graham Sanctioning Russia and Iran Act of 2026, sanctions Russian officials, banks, and a shadow fleet of oil tankers that keeps Russian energy moving to global markets. It directs Trump to impose tariffs of up to 100 percent on the top five countries that import Russian oil or natural gas, with a narrow exception for nations importing less than 15 percent of Russia's natural gas exports that have taken significant steps to cut those purchases. AP reported the bill also includes a five-year extension of existing sanctions on Iran.
The Senate passed the bill 86, 11. The House cleared it Wednesday evening, 262, 159. Those margins reflect a level of bipartisan agreement rare in the current Congress, and a sharp rebuke of Moscow more than four years into Russia's war against Ukraine.
The bill's origin story is inseparable from Lindsey Graham himself. The South Carolina Republican spent well over a year drafting the legislation alongside Sen. Richard Blumenthal, a Connecticut Democrat. Graham had just returned from Ukraine when he died unexpectedly in July. His sister, Darline Graham, was appointed to complete his Senate term.
On the day Trump signed the bill, Darline Graham issued a statement honoring her brother's work:
"I wish Lindsey were here to celebrate this historic day. I know he would be so proud. Lindsey believed this bill, which he worked on for well over a year, would help end the war through squeezing Putin economically and forcing his customers to reevaluate their relationship with Russia."
Blumenthal, who co-drafted the legislation, struck a similar note after the House vote. He said Graham would have been "jubilant about our bill's passage, and already thinking about the next one." He added a blunter assessment of the Russian president: "Putin is a thug who understands only force and strength, which is what we must show clearly and unequivocally."
That a Republican hawk and a liberal Democrat built this bill together, and that it survived the death of its lead sponsor to reach the president's desk, says something about the durability of the underlying policy case. The war in Ukraine has now dragged on for more than four years. Russia's energy revenues continue to fund its military operations. The bill's central bet is that squeezing those revenues, and penalizing the countries that keep buying Russian oil and gas, will force Moscow to recalculate.
The bill does more than sanction Russian entities. Fox News reported that the legislation grants Trump authority to impose tariffs of up to 500 percent on Russian imports and up to 100 percent on the top five countries purchasing Russian energy. That second provision is the one that drew the sharpest opposition from Democrats, not because they objected to pressuring Russia, but because they feared the breadth of the tariff powers being handed to the executive branch.
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries laid out that argument on the floor. He warned that Trump could use the expanded authority to impose tariffs on the European Union and other allies, not just on countries enabling Russian energy exports:
"Why in the world would this Congress or the People's House give this president unfettered authority to visit more tariffs on the world that will have an adverse economic impact on the American people?"
Jeffries went further, arguing the bill's structure contained enough loopholes that sanctions on Russia might never materialize. "The manner in which this bill has been written doesn't require the president of the United States to impose sanctions on Russia," the New York Post reported him saying. "In fact, there are so many loopholes written into the bill, I believe that it's very unlikely that the sanctions relief contemplated in the legislation will ever see the light of day."
Jeffries's objections did not carry the day. Fifty-three House Democrats broke with their party leadership and voted for the bill alongside 203 Republicans. That split within the Democratic caucus is notable, and not the first time Jeffries has faced questions about members crossing the aisle against his wishes.
The White House, for its part, required assurances before Trump gave his approval. Officials needed to be convinced that the president would retain sufficient flexibility on how and when to apply the sanctions. That condition was met, and Trump signed the bill.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky praised the signing and pressed for rapid action. "I thank President Trump for signing this critically important legislation," Just The News reported Zelensky saying. He also thanked the senators and House members who supported the bill, adding: "The best way to honor Lindsey's memory will be to implement the provisions of this law fully and swiftly."
Rep. Michael McCaul, a Texas Republican, framed the stakes in broader terms. "Evil is on the march, history is calling, and now is the time to act," McCaul said.
The bill's Iran provisions add another dimension. By extending existing Iran sanctions for five years, the legislation locks in economic pressure on Tehran at a time when the administration has already moved aggressively on that front. Trump's earlier "Operation Economic Outcast" campaign targeting Iran's economy signaled a willingness to use every available tool, sanctions, tariffs, and diplomatic warnings, to isolate hostile regimes financially.
The vote tallies, 86, 11 in the Senate, 262, 159 in the House, are lopsided by any modern standard. But the fault lines within those numbers tell a more complicated story. Most Republicans backed the bill. Most Democrats in the House voted against it, despite the legislation's stated goal of punishing Russia for its invasion of Ukraine.
The Democratic opposition centered almost entirely on the tariff provisions, not on the sanctions themselves. Jeffries and his allies argued that handing Trump broad tariff authority was too high a price to pay for a Russia sanctions package, even one named after a beloved colleague. That argument put Democrats in the awkward position of voting against a bill designed to punish Vladimir Putin because they objected to the economic tools it gave an American president.
The result was a significant legislative win for the White House. Trump secured expanded economic authority with bipartisan cover, signed a bill that honors a close ally, and positioned the administration as tougher on Russia than its critics. It comes during a stretch of aggressive executive action on multiple fronts, from foreign policy recalibrations to contentious legislative maneuvering on Capitol Hill.
Whether the sanctions bite as hard as their sponsors intended will depend on how aggressively the administration enforces them. Jeffries predicted the loopholes would swallow the policy. Zelensky urged speed. Darline Graham invoked her brother's conviction that economic pressure could end the war.
The bill is law now. The question is whether it becomes a turning point or a gesture, and that answer rests with the man who just signed it.
