Breakingviews - US Congress will be reluctant trade war spoiler

WASHINGTON, May 14 (Reuters Breakingviews) - Donald Trump may have temporarily paused his trade war with China and other countries. But the extreme economic uncertainty unleashed by the president's tariffs still raises the question of what, if anything, can stop his assault on global commerce. The White House has relied on an expansive interpretation of existing laws to impose a dizzying array of levies on trade partners around the world. If risky legal challenges and faltering negotiations fail to bear fruit, Congress could reclaim its primacy over trade – but only if the economic and political costs become too large to ignore.
Under the U.S. Constitution's Commerce Clause, the legislative branch has jurisdiction over foreign and domestic trade. Congress must approve treaties, including trade deals, while also determining tax policy, of which tariffs are a part. Over the past century, however, the legislature delegated more of that authority to executive bodies with technical expertise, like the U.S. Trade Representative and the Department of Commerce, relegating itself to an advice-and-consent relationship with the president. Until recently, it was easy to ignore how power had shifted from the Constitution's intent. But Trump's overreach has become more obvious, prompting a reaction.
The most direct domestic challenge to the president so far has come through the courts. At least six lawsuits, opens new tab have been filed in federal courts challenging the Trump tariffs. The plaintiffs are small businesses, Democratic state attorneys general, and a Native American tribe. The lawsuits target the legal authorities underpinning Trump's 10% across-the-board tariff on nearly all goods imports, which the White House attributes, opens new tab to the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act.
No previous president has used the law to justify tariffs. Indeed, the word 'tariff' does not appear as a remedy the president may use to address 'unusual and extraordinary threats' to national security, opens new tab or the U.S. economy. The plaintiffs argue that a 'persistent trade deficit,' the reason the administration gives for imposing the tariffs, hardly constitute a rare situation or a particularly dangerous threat that warrants an emergency response. A hearing for one of the cases took place in federal trade court on Tuesday.
It's hard to see the U.S. Supreme Court, which will be the ultimate arbiter of the issue, accepting the plaintiffs' argument that the administration's actions far exceed its authorities under the law. Supreme Court justices have previously been reluctant to interfere with the president's conduct of foreign policy, including in recent immigration cases. At the same time, though, the court took a dim view of President Joe Biden's expansive use of emergency powers for domestic purposes during the pandemic. In 2023, it struck down his administration's mass cancellation of student loans, arguing that he was overstepping his power, despite the existence of a law giving the president the ability to 'waive and modify' government debts during a national emergency.
Failure to block the tariffs in court would leave the Republican-controlled Congress as the remaining domestic avenue for stopping Trump's trade policy. That's not as far-fetched as it may seem. The Senate has already voted on resolutions of disapproval of the president's tariffs, one of which passed with four Republicans voting in favor. Republicans in the House of Representatives have used procedural chicanery to prevent a vote on the measure, at least for now. House Speaker Mike Johnson, a close Trump ally, says he's giving the president the benefit of the doubt on trade policy. But even he nodded, opens new tab to Congress's prerogative in setting trade policy: 'If it gets close to where the imbalance is there, then we would step in,' Johnson said on April 30.
Challenging the president's signature economic policy would be a brave act of rebellion for Republicans in Congress that would carry heavy political costs, including the ever-present threat of an election primary challenge that hangs over insufficiently loyal members. Trump frequently targets legislative rebels on social media, an unwanted burden for representatives who face re-election in 2026. Besides, even if Congress did vote to limit his powers, the president still has a veto. Overcoming that would require a two-thirds majority in each chamber. That would require a lot of Republicans to defy Trump: 14 senators and upwards of 75 congressmen, assuming all Democrats supported the move. A challenge might become more feasible if Democrats take control of one or both legislative chambers after the midterm elections in November 2026, but that would be too late to prevent the economic fallout from the trade war.
Still, the case for eventually pruning presidential trade powers continues to gain support. Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa, the dean of farm state Republicans, introduced legislation the day after Trump's April 2 'Liberation Day' announcements to pry back authority from the executive. The bill, opens new tab, co-led by Senator Maria Cantwell - whose state of Washington is home to Amazon, Microsoft, and major Boeing facilities - would sunset presidential tariffs after 60 days if Congress did not vote to approve them. The bill now has 13 co-sponsors, seven of them Republicans. While the bill wouldn't resolve the current crisis, it's a sign that a backlash to Trump could codify longer-term changes to trade law.
The administration's climbdown in its confrontation with China, announced on Monday, should limit the immediate damage from halting trade between the world's two largest economies. Still, retailers project imminent disruptions in the flow of consumer goods to shelves. Expectations for inflation in the year ahead have spiked to 5% in May from 2.6% in November 2024, according to the University of Michigan, raising the prospect of unexpected price increases that doomed Biden's presidency. The economic roller coaster has already hurt Trump's popularity: his net approval rating has slipped from -2.8% on April 2 to -6.9% on Monday, according to, opens new tab political analyst Nate Silver.
All longer-term changes to trade policy remain on hold, for now, as the parallel tracks of litigation and international negotiation proceed. A supply chain crisis or rapid downturn in economic conditions would likely be necessary to change the political terrain enough for Republicans in Congress, tight in Trump's grip, to buck him in sufficient quantities. No doubt they are hoping it won't come to that.
Follow @Rubinations, opens new tab on X
CONTEXT NEWS
On April 23, 12 Democratic state attorneys general sued to block many of the Trump administration's tariffs on grounds that they had 'upended the constitutional order and brought chaos to the American economy.' California separately sued the administration, claiming the president's policies harmed its economy and budget.
Mike Johnson, speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, said on April 30 that the 'executive has a broad array of authority that's been recognized over the years' related to trade, but left open the possibility of congressional intervention: 'If it gets close to where the imbalance is there, then we would step in.'

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Daily Mail​

36 minutes ago

• Daily Mail​

US begins evacuating residents from Israel as Trump sends in B-2 bombers and Netanyahu gives ultimate warning ahead potential strike on Iran

Americans are being evacuated from Israel as a number of B-2 stealth bombers were deployed to the region in anticipation of a possible strike against an Iranian nuclear facility. Mike Huckabee - the US Ambassador to Israel - urged US citizens in the country to complete a crisis intake form that would help them seek a way back to America, if the opportunity arises. 'With airspace mostly closed, the challenges are great,' Huckabee warned. 'If given an option, TAKE IT.' Israeli carrier El Al said on Saturday that as of Monday they would be offering 50 seats on flights departing from Tel Aviv to eight destinations including New York and Los Angeles to those looking to flee the region. President Donald Trump departed his golf club in Bedminster, New Jersey on Saturday evening and headed back to The White House where he had a scheduled meeting with his national security team. 'Only time will tell!' Trump posted on his Truth Social Saturday afternoon along with a video warning of possible US involvement. Trump has previously indicated that he would give Iran a two week deadline to abandon their nuclear project. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, however, have told his administration that they refuse to wait two weeks for Trump to make up his mind, according to The Times of Israel. Sources who spoke with the outlet say Israel communicated this to officials in the US on Thursday, in what was described as a tense phone call. Those on the call included Netanyahu, as sources added the Israelis want to strike the Iranian Fordow enrichment facility. The US is the only country in the world with the bunker-busting bombs capable of hitting the nuclear facility, which is buried deep into a mountain. Sources also told the outlet that the Israelis believe they have a small window to move on the site. Vice President JD Vance had been on the call, and said he didn't want the US directly involved in the conflict, suggesting Israel was pulling the US into war. Four sources told the Times that it is now likely that Israel will soon launch their own operation to hit the facility, despite not having the munitions necessary. Netanyahu has frequently said the goal of the attacks on Iran was to eliminate its missile and nuclear program, which he described as an existential threat to Israel. On Saturday, the Israel Defense Forces also shared a clip of them striking F-14 fighter jets belonging to the Iranian Armed Forces. The bomb capable of hitting the facility is configured and programed to the B-2 spirit stealth bomber, according to the Air Force. On Saturday, six of those bombers left from Whiteman Air Force Base in Missouri destined for another base in Guam. The bombers are said to have been refueled, which means they could have launched without full tanks due to the extraordinarily heavy bunker-buster bombs. It was not clear whether the aircraft were a show of force or prepared for an operation. There are possible complications that could arise if the US strikes Fordo, located 60 miles southwest of Tehran, with the bunker-buster bomb. As well as being some 260 feet under rock and soil, the site is reportedly protected by Iranian and Russian surface-to-air missile systems. Those air defenses, however, are believed to have been weakened by recent Israeli attacks. Additionally, any US strike carries significant political and diplomatic risks for Trump, who has long warned against entangling the US in overseas conflicts. For example, Russia has warned that US involvement could 'radically destabilize the Middle East.' Military engagement could also jeopardize any chance of Trump's desired talks with Iran over its nuclear program. President Trump was scheduled to meet with his national security team at the White House on Saturday to discuss joining the Israeli attack. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said U.S. military involvement 'would be very, very dangerous for everyone.' Trump warned that Tehran has a 'maximum' of two weeks to avoid possible American air strikes if they don't abandon their nuclear ambitions. Trump publicly disagreed with Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, who testified in March that there is 'no evidence' Iran is building a nuclear weapon. 'She's wrong,' Trump said Friday in New Jersey just off to the side of Air Force One. 'My intelligence community is wrong.' Gabbard has since reversed course and clarified that Iran could produce nukes 'within weeks to months, if they decide to finalize the assembly.' 'President Trump has been clear that can't happen, and I agree,' she added. ⭕️The IDF struck F-14 fighter jets belonging to the Iranian Armed Forced in central Iran. Additionally, IAF fighter jets are currently striking military infrastructure in central Iran. — Israel Defense Forces (@IDF) June 21, 2025 The war between the two countries began when Israel launched what it called Operation Rising Lion on Friday, June 13. Israel targeted nuclear sites and military sites within Iran, while also killing many of Iran's top military commanders. At least 722 people, including 285 civilians, have been killed in Iran and more than 2,500 wounded, according to a Washington-based Iranian human rights group. Iran has retaliated by firing more than 450 missiles and 1,000 drones at Israel, according to Israeli army estimates. The strikes killed at least 24 people. Iran has long maintained its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes, but it is the only non-nuclear-weapon state to enrich uranium up to 60% - a short, technical step away from weapons-grade levels of 90%. Israel is widely

Times

43 minutes ago

• Times

Trump's taking Maga fire over ‘forever wars', but the real battle awaits

'I'm the one that decides,' declared President Trump last week when asked by a reporter who gets to say what 'America First' really means. Faced with a backlash from parts of his base over the prospect of the US supporting Israel in military action in Iran, the president said his word is final — 'after all, I'm the one that developed America First' — adding that 'the term wasn't used until I came along'. In fact, the phrase dates back to the First World War when Woodrow Wilson used the slogan to appeal to voters who wanted America to stay out of the conflict. (They didn't get their wish.) The America First Committee was founded in 1940 to protest against US involvement in the Second World War, but gained notoriety after high-profile members such as the aviator Charles Lindbergh and the automotive tycoon Henry Ford led to a perception that it had antisemitic and pro-fascist sympathies. However, since Trump launched his first bid for president ten years ago, it has taken on a new meaning. 'He has driven the term back into usage,' says Julian Zelizer, the Princeton University historian and author of The Presidency of Donald J Trump: A First Historical Assessment. 'He has the most power to shape what it actually includes.' Now it represents a whole movement, extending from foreign policy to trade to immigration. No more forever wars. No more favours for other countries out of the goodness of Uncle Sam's heart. But in a week where parts of Trump's base came out and criticised the president directly, the question is being asked in Washington: is Trump still in control of the agenda — or is it the base that decides? There are certainly plenty of figures in Washington who have distinct views on what America First ought to mean in practice. Last week, the row over Iran has seen a US version of blue on blue: Maga on Maga. As the alt-right influencer Jack Posobiec put it: 'I'm just thankful the neocons are here to tell us who is REAL MAGA.' Trump has distanced himself from certain members of his cabinet, saying that his head of intelligence Tulsi Gabbard is 'wrong' on her intelligence assessment of Iran. But in his second term, Trump has had ultimate authority over his cabinet. Learning from the first term, he picked them for loyalty and deference. As a figure with close ties to the administration says: 'It's a football team. He's the manager, they're the players, they listen to the manager and that's all there is to it.' It is why the voices he needs to worry more about may be the ones on the outside. Enter the Maga-verse — the network of former advisers, informal advisers and influencers free to speak, exerting varying degrees of influence on the president. One figure close to the White House says: 'There are a bunch of people that we look to to see how things are landing.' Indeed, the administration last week reached out to key figures as they tried to control the narrative. There are different spheres of influence. Steve Bannon, Trump's former adviser, is widely regarded as the godfather of Maga. While he no longer has a place in the White House, he is seen as a temperature check on the movement by keeping the government in touch with the grassroots through his media and bringing up the next generation of Maga — several of whom have gone on to take jobs in the administration. 'Everybody just folds to whatever big corporate interest there is and this administration is only slightly different to that,' explains an insider. 'Steve keeps a check on it.' Bannon's War Room podcast regularly ranks among the top ten in the US, and has more than 200,000 followers on X. The former executive chairman of the alt-right news website Breitbart had lunch with the president last week — just before Trump's spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt announced a two-week window to make a decision on his next steps in Iran. Next, Tucker Carlson — the former Fox News host — who last week accused Trump of taking America on the wrong path. This led to Trump saying: 'I don't know what Tucker Carlson is saying. Let him go get a television network and say it so that people listen.' 'He's definitely relevant,' says one Maga figure. 'But it's a much younger, less-likely-to-vote demographic that he now appeals to. It's a much lower propensity voter. I don't think he would take that as an insult. He lives in a cabin in the woods in Maine.' After the barrage of words, Trump later said he shared a phone call with Carlson who apologised for going too far. Then there's Laura Loomer — the right-wing conspiracy theorist — who regularly leads the news in DC with her social media and investigations. A Republican insider says: 'She's probably the best opposition researcher in Republican politics nationwide and she's devastatingly destructive to people. Some people might walk around with their chest puffed out and go, 'Oh, I'm not scared of Laura Loomer.' They're all scared of Laura Loomer.' Last week, Loomer and Carlson have clashed on Iran, while Bannon warned against the US getting too embroiled in any conflict. The changing media landscape is giving these figures greater prominence. Matt Boyle, the Washington bureau chief at Breitbart, says: 'We live in impassioned times, especially in the podcast era and new media.' It's not gone unnoticed in Maga world that last week streaming overtook cable and broadcast as the most-watched form of TV in the US. Yet the base is insistent there is no civil war. 'We're not a monolith, we're not the left, they don't tolerate dissent, right?' says one Maga figure. 'One part of the coalition is holding the other part of the coalition accountable.' Boyle, who was recently spotted dining with both Bannon and the Democrat senator John Fetterman, says: 'I do think that when the president makes his decision that the movement is gonna fall in line very quickly. He is the leader of the America First movement. He built this movement.' Yet Trump has never been a perfect fit for some of the views within it. In 2016, he said of America First that he wanted to make decision-making more 'unpredictable'. 'We won't be isolationists — I don't want to go there because I don't believe in that,' Trump said. 'But we're not going to be ripped off any more by all of these countries.' The historian Victor Davis Hanson, of the Hoover Institution think tank at Stanford University, says: 'Trump is neither an isolationist nor an interventionist, but rather transactional. The media fails to grasp that, so it is confused why tough-guy Trump is hesitant to jump into Iran, or contrarily why a noninterventionist Trump would even consider using bunker busters against Iran. 'The common thread again is his perception of what benefits the US middle class — economically, militarily, politically and culturally.' But internal debates go beyond foreign affairs. The other main Maga priorities are bringing jobs back to the US — through tariffs — and cracking down on immigration. Tensions have bubbled on all of these: last week Trump exempted the farm and hospitality industries from the immigration raids, only for Maga activists to raise alarm. The president then changed it back. Raheem Kassam, who is a close ally of Bannon, a co-owner of the Butterworths restaurant in Washington — a Maga hotspot — and a former adviser to Nigel Farage, says: 'It's definitely become more complex and thoughtful and flexible. 'There's now a depth where you can't necessarily fit all of Maga policy on a banner held up at a rally. You used to be able to say it was 'build the wall', 'drain the swamp'. It's developed more, it's deeper, it's denser and that's kind of what the establishment is really upset about this time. It's like, 'Oh, these guys have actually developed an element of political sophistication.'' For now, most agree — at least publicly — that Trump is king. Yet privately what is making the base so jumpy is this idea that Trump is being forced by the deep state into the default establishment policy position. If it happens to Trump, what chance does his successor have? Hanson says: 'Trump decides — in the sense of le Maga état, c'est moi. Almost everyone who tried to redefine Maga or take on Trump has mostly lost rather than gained influence. 'The key question is whether Maga continues after 2029, given Trump's unique willingness to take on the left rhetorically and concretely in a way that far exceeds the Reagan revolution, and in truth, any prior Republican. Trump's bellicosity, volatility, and resilience — his willingness to win ugly rather than lose nobly — ensure him credibility and goodwill among the base that in turn allows him greater latitude and patience.' Or as a recent visitor to the White House puts it: 'A lot of them want a Maga ideology whereas Trump is happy with it just being about him.' Kassam adds: 'Trump does largely get to decide what America First means. But the point is, there's a whole movement behind it that will want to keep the America First agenda even after Trump.' The real fight to define America First is likely to come when Trump exits the stage.

NBC News

an hour ago

• NBC News

Ex-Texas U.S. Rep. Blake Farenthold, who left office amid harassment allegations, dies at 63

Former Texas Republican U.S. Rep. Blake Farenthold, who left Congress amid sexual harassment allegations, has died. He was 63. He died in a Corpus Christi hospital and suffered heart and liver problems in recent years, Steve Ray, his former longtime political consultant, said. Farenthold's wife, Debbie Farenthold, confirmed that he died Friday. Blake Farenthold was elected in 2010, upsetting long-serving Democratic U.S. Rep. Solomon Ortiz. Seven years later, Farenthold announced that he wouldn't seek reelection. In a video he posted on his campaign's Facebook page at the time, he denied a former aide's three-year-old accusations, which included that he'd subjected her to sexually suggestive comments and behavior and then fired her after she complained. He apologized for an office atmosphere he said included 'destructive gossip, offhand comments, off-color jokes and behavior that in general was less than professional.' He said in the video that if he stayed in Congress, he would have spent months trying to vindicate himself. 'We all make mistakes,' Ray said Saturday. 'He made some mistakes.' Ray described him as a 'techie' who was interested in the internet and technology before getting involved in politics. 'He did a tremendous job as congressman for this area,' Ray said, noting that Farenthold cared about fighting crime and promoting transparency. 'His heart was really always in the right place.' Before becoming a congressman, Farenthold was a sidekick for a conservative radio talk show host, Ray said. 'When he decided to run, nobody in the world thought he was going to win,' Ray said. When he left office, Farenthold started his own radio show, which he continued until he died. In addition to his wife, Farenthold is survived by two adult daughters, Morgan Baucum and Amanda Lawrence, Ray said.