Washington – As the impact on President Trump's tariffs continues to have an impact on the Congressional economy, some Republicans in Congress have begun to discuss how to curb the president's ability to impose tariffs – a rare step to control the party's leaders.
Republican leaders have largely developed a “waiting attitude” attitude towards tariffs, and their ongoing impact on stock market plunges and consumer sentiment. Speaker Mike Johnson Tell reporters On Monday, Congress “weighted Congress but was with the president and with the administration.”
“I think you have to give the president a latitude, be the runway of his election, and that's to get the economy forward again and get our trade in a proper balance with other countries,” Johnson said.
But others in Congress (including California Republicans) don't want to wait.
Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IOWA) joined Senator Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) and other members of the two sides to propose a bill last week to reaffirm Congress’ powers and limit the president’s power over trade policy. The Trade Review Act of 2025 will require the president to notify Congress of any new tariffs within 48 hours and provide analysis and justification for its purposes. This will also allow Congress to review taxes for 60 days.
Grassley posted Grassley on X.
Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.) said on Sunday that he will introduce a peer bill in the House so that progress can be made in both rooms.
Californians’ support
Hanford Republicans include California Rep. David Valadao, who already has a volatile swing seat in the 22nd Congressional District, has already raised support for legislation. Valadao said on Sunday in News Country that he needed to “look at Bacon's proposal better”, but that's “things should be considered”.
“I have always been a person who supports the way our Founding Fathers designed to support Congress,” Varada said. “It’s one of the powers that belong to Congress, and I think it’s a very serious way.”
Valadao represents the agriculturally abundant land of the Central Valley, home to acres of almond farms and lemon woods. The MP said he had heard from voters on both sides of the tariff debate that their exporters were receiving warm receptions from other countries, as well as those looking to raise tariffs on competitive industries. As the dairy farm himself, Valado said he once lobbyed lawmakers to tariffs on countries that had different labor standards or regulations than the United States, which made it harder for U.S. companies to compete.
“They competed against me on the grocery store shelves, which was frustrating,” Varada said. “I think it's a shame.” [tariffs] Should be used as a tool to enter a level playing field. ”
Other support for legislation on Monday, bankers talked about an imminent recession as markets continued to decline. Senator Deb Fischer (R-Neb.) said on Fox Business on Monday that she hopes to “give the president time” to see the impact of the tariffs. However, she admitted: “It is very important to have opinions on these tariffs.”
A spokesman for Rep. Kim, R-Anaheim Hills, who represents another swing congressional district in California, said the White House news “encourages” the delegate to “encourages” the delegate, that countries have been lined up to negotiate relief from tariffs.
“Rep. King knows the importance of free trade to the Southern California economy and believes we can strengthen the U.S. industry while promoting free trade with like-minded allies and partners,” spokesman Callie Strock said in a statement. “While tariffs can be a strategic tool, Rep. Kim is concerned about the impact of long-term tariffs on families and small businesses already injured by high taxes and cost of living.”
Another California Republican Rep. Tom McClintock, Posted On X last week, “Our trade goals must be: zero tariffs, zero subsidies and zero non-tariff barriers. Tariffs always harm any country imposed by the country. Their only reason is to use trading partners to pass the free trade agreement. I hope this is where the president goes.”
When asked about comments from representatives of Elk Grove, spokesman Jennifer Cressy said that since McClintock opposed the tariffs in a 2018 House floor speech, “his views have not changed.”
“There is no perfect way to impose tariffs on imports into a scarce way,” McClintock said at the time. “Remember that every producer in a society is also a consumer. No consumer benefits from higher prices, nor does it benefit from scarce materials. Every country that has tried protectionism has suffered a huge loss, including our materials.”
Despite the complaints in Congress, Trump still advanced. He posted an article on his website on Monday threatening a strike against China, the world's largest trading nation, which retaliated against Trump's 34% tariffs last week.
Is Trump's tariffs a constitution?
The Constitution gives Congress the power to taxes, responsibilities, imports, exports and exports, including “trade norms with foreign countries.”
However, over the years, Congress began with the Reciprocal Trade Agreement Act of 1934, giving the executive more room for foreign trade.
“When you look at executive orders in the field, it's really a question of whether what the president does falls within the scope of a regulation that Congress basically throws the ball to the executive branch,” Levinson said.
The New Civil Liberties Union is already a non-profit legal organization that questioned excessive administrative law and has filed complaints accusing tariffs of unconstitutionality. Trump cited the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to issue tariffs, and under the regulations, the new Civil Liberties Union claims action is not allowed.
Bacon agrees CBS News' “Facing the Country” On Sunday, Trump's announcement was not a real exercise of emergency power, but a change in tariff policies.
“This is where Congress has to step in, do we really want to put in new policies on tariffs?” Bacon said. “If so, it should come from Congress, not the president.”
Another bill proposed by the Virginia Democrats in the Senate last week would actually block U.S. tariffs on Canada, and Trump ended the national emergency by declaring a national emergency to the fentanyl crisis.
Another legal issue with the president’s tariffs is that Congress was wrong when it handed over its taxes to the executive branch, said Josh Robbins, an attorney for the Pacific Law Foundation.
“Congress unconstitutionally abandoned too much authority in a regulation… He really didn’t have any guardrails once he declared an emergency,” Robbins said.
During Trump's first term, when he invoked steel tariffs, Congress made a bipartisan effort in Congress to curb the president's power, which ultimately failed.
