Republican Lawmakers Consider Limits on Trump’s Tariff Powers
WASHINGTON — In the wake of ongoing economic turbulence caused by President Trump’s tariffs, a faction of Republican legislators is exploring ways to limit the president’s authority over trade policy. This development marks an unusual effort to exert congressional oversight over the party leader’s decisions.
Current Stance on Tariffs
While many Republican leaders prefer a wait-and-see approach regarding the impact of tariffs on the stock market and public sentiment, others believe action is necessary. Speaker Mike Johnson indicated to reporters that Congress would eventually collaborate with the administration on this matter, emphasizing the need to respect the president’s mandate to stimulate the economy and establish more equitable trade relations.
However, a growing number of members, including certain Republicans from California, are advocating for immediate legislative action. Senator Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), in collaboration with Senator Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), recently introduced the Trade Review Act of 2025. This bipartisan legislation aims to restore congressional authority by mandating that the president notify Congress of any new tariffs within 48 hours, complete with a justification and analysis, allowing lawmakers 60 days for review.
Support from California Republicans
Several Republican representatives, particularly from California, have shown support for this legislative initiative. Representative David Valadao, who represents California’s agrarian 22nd Congressional District, acknowledged the importance of empowering Congress. In a recent interview, Valadao stated, “I’ve always been someone who supports giving power back to the Congress the way our founding fathers originally designed.” He expressed concerns that the tariffs have varying effects on his constituents, from farmers facing adverse market conditions to those advocating for more protectionist measures.
Other legislators are weighing in as well. Representative Don Bacon (R-Neb.) is expected to introduce a companion bill in the House, facilitating a coordinated approach between both chambers of Congress.
Reaction to Market Trends and Economic Woes
The backdrop of declining markets and fears of a looming recession has intensified calls for congressional intervention. Senator Deb Fischer (R-Neb.) acknowledged the importance of congressional input on tariff policies, even as she supports giving the president time to evaluate their impact. Similarly, Representative Young Kim (R-Anaheim Hills) has expressed a commitment to free trade and acknowledges the concerns surrounding long-term tariffs’ effects on families and businesses already burdened by high costs.
In contrast, Representative Tom McClintock voiced strong opposition to tariffs, highlighting their detrimental effects on both producers and consumers. He reiterated his stance against protectionism, arguing for a focus on zero tariffs and subsidies as the ideal trade objective.
Constitutional Implications of Tariff Power
There are ongoing debates about the constitutional legitimacy of the president’s tariff powers. The U.S. Constitution assigns Congress the authority to regulate commerce and impose taxes. Over the decades, however, Congress has increasingly delegated this authority to the executive branch, starting with the Reciprocal Trade Agreements Act of 1934, which allowed the president to make unilateral tariff adjustments.
Critics argue that this delegation has led to an improper expansion of presidential authority. The New Civil Liberties Alliance has filed a lawsuit claiming that Trump’s tariffs, implemented under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, exceed the powers granted by Congress.
Bacon, on a recent television segment, emphasized the need for Congress to reassess the evolving nature of tariff policies, suggesting that such significant decisions should rest with the legislative branch. Furthermore, Democratic senators from Virginia are pursuing a separate bill to terminate the national emergency concerning tariffs on Canada, further complicating the president’s trade agenda.
A History of Legislative Backlash
Historically, previous attempts to curtail the president’s authority over tariffs have met resistance. During Trump’s initial term, bipartisan efforts to limit tariff powers did not gain traction. As the situation unfolds, the administration appears steadfast, with Trump signaling a possible veto of any bill that hinders his tariff powers, as indicated by reports from Politico.
As Congress navigates these challenges, the balance of power between legislative and executive authorities in trade policy remains a pivotal discussion in American politics.