Republican legislators are wary of opposing President Trump, yet they also have reservations about his trade wars. Many are attempting to lend support to the judiciary or at least maintain neutrality amid the ongoing disputes.
Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) expressed that he was “sympathetic” to a resolution that the Senate considered earlier this year.
“I had sympathy for the resolution, and it’s not necessarily the case that the court misjudged it,” Johnson remarked.
The proposal ultimately failed to pass the Senate, concluding with a 49-49 vote.
When asked if the trade court challenged Trump’s authority to impose tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, Johnson replied: “I don’t think so.”
Two courts, the U.S. International Trade Court and the District of Columbia, have remained silent after opposing Trump’s retaliatory tariffs, marking a significant setback for his trade agenda.
Republican lawmakers theorize that the Supreme Court will eventually determine Trump’s legal authority to impose sudden tariffs for negotiation leverage, although they privately acknowledge that a ruling against Trump could simplify their lives.
Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), who co-sponsored a resolution to end the national emergency declaration used by Trump for global tariffs, indicated that his Republican peers are closely monitoring how the trade war’s second quarter impacts economic growth.
“If second quarter growth turns negative, we might see something significant happen,” Paul stated.
“I’m unsure what the second quarter figures will reflect, but I’m keen to observe what unfolds. A significant portion of the tariffs have yet to take effect,” he added.
A Republican senator, who spoke on the condition of anonymity regarding the trade war’s effects on Trump’s economy, mentioned that businesses are seeking more certainty around trade and tariffs.
“Uncertainty presents numerous challenges,” the senator noted. “I predominantly support a reaffirmation of Congress’s authority,” referring to Congress’s constitutional powers over taxes and obligations.
This senator welcomed the court’s decision to restrict Trump’s customs authority.
“While I am pleased that it enhances Congress’s power, it also provides greater certainty for decision-makers, which is crucial for the economy’s short-term health,” the lawmaker stated.
Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) introduced bipartisan legislation earlier this year aimed at curtailing Trump’s tariff authority but declined to comment on the recent court ruling, mentioning the importance of the Supreme Court in deciding the extent of Trump’s powers.
“I don’t believe we should express our views until the appeal process is completed,” he said.
The veteran Iowa senator hopes to restore customs authority to Congress but clarified that he does not wish to position himself against Trump.
“I aim to reclaim this power for Congress,” he said, regarding the ability to impose tariffs. “But keep in mind that the legislation I proposed looks toward the future, so labeling it strictly as a move against Trump isn’t fair.”
Grassley’s bill mandates that any tariffs imposed by the president would expire 60 days later, unless Congress ratifies them.
Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.), a long-time skeptic of using tariffs to influence the domestic market, stated that Trump, as commander-in-chief, has a valid argument for imposing sudden import fees to protect the nation from challenges like fentanyl and illegal immigration.
“It will be intriguing to see where the Supreme Court eventually lands,” Thune remarked on Monday. “If it’s framed as a national security concern—indeed an economic security issue—there exists a debate regarding the commander-in-chief’s powers. I believe the administration has a compelling argument, yet the courts have ruled differently.”
“Ultimately, I hope to see the best outcomes come to fruition,” he added.
Last week, Trump expressed his dissatisfaction following a trade court ruling that declared he lacked the authority to impose tariffs and adjust them based on trade negotiations.
He denounced the ruling as “so wrong” and “so political,” urging the Supreme Court to swiftly and decisively overturn this “disturbing, national threat decision.”
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit stayed a trade court order for the White House to promptly lift the tariffs revealed on April 2nd, designated as “Freeing Day.”
However, a federal court in D.C. also blocked the tariffs.
Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) mentioned that Trump “has many other authorities he can utilize” to maintain his leverage in the trade war.
In the wake of last week’s legal setback, Trump doubled the tariffs on foreign steel and aluminum by 50%, invoking Section 232 of the 1962 Trade Expansion Act.
This action demonstrated Trump’s unwillingness to relinquish the trade war. Even if the Supreme Court ultimately upholds the lower court’s decision, the president displayed that he retains “unbounded authority” under the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act.
Kevin Hassett, director of the White House Economic Council, expressed hope last week that the Supreme Court would affirm Trump’s legal authority.
“We also have other avenues we can pursue to ensure we’re putting American fairness back in place,” he stated.
Trump’s implementation of sudden tariffs for negotiation leverage has created anxiety among Republican senators, who are observing a stock market surge and receiving increasing complaints from their districts.
According to polling data by Nate Silver, the president’s approval ratings for trade are more than nine points underwater, while his economic approval sits 11 points below.
Overall, 45.8% of Americans approve of Trump’s job performance, whereas 50.6% disapprove based on Silver’s polling average.
Thus far, Trump’s only announced a major trade agreement with the UK following his steep tariffs on various countries starting April 2nd.
Treasury Secretary Scott Bescent reported “significant progress” in US-China discussions on May 11, but by the end of the month, negotiations “were slowing,” suggesting Trump should engage directly with the Chinese president.
Deputy Director Michael Folkender mentioned on Monday that “more deals” could be forthcoming by early July.
“As long as we continue to make progress, I believe we’ll see numerous deals announced before the July 9th deadline,” he informed CNBC’s “Squawk Box.”
Source: thehill.com