Congress Just Made It Harder for Congress To Block Trump's Tariffs
The cowardice of Congress will continue fueling the growth of executive power.

President Donald Trump's reckless tariff policies are threatening to drive the economy into a ditch—and Congress just made it harder to take away the keys.
In a near party-line vote on Tuesday afternoon, the House of Representatives blocked the most direct pathway for lawmakers to revoke the emergency executive powers Trump used last month to impose tariffs on goods from Canada, Mexico, and China. That change helps further cement executive control over trade policy and creates additional challenges for lawmakers seeking to claw back some control over tariff decisions.
"It speaks volumes that Republicans are sneaking this provision into a procedural measure hidden from the American people," said Reps. Don Beyer (D–Va.) and Suzan DelBene (D–Wash.) in a joint statement on Tuesday.
Fair warning: The details of what happened are a bit wonky.
Before passing a continuing resolution to keep the government open, the House had to pass a separate resolution setting the rules for the debate over the stopgap spending bill. This is a routine thing. On this occasion, however, Republican leaders slipped a provision into the rules resolution that makes a long-term change to how the House will operate.
"Each day for the remainder of the first session of the 119th Congress shall not constitute a calendar day for purposes of section 202 of the National Emergencies Act with respect to a joint resolution terminating a national emergency declared by the President on February 1, 2025," is how the relevant portion of the rules package spells things out.
Yes, bizarrely, Congress can declare a day to not be a day because Congress can make whatever rules it wants to govern its own proceedings.
To understand the practical effect of that confusing language, you have to know a little bit about the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), which is the law that Trump used to slap those new tariffs on Canada, China, and Mexico in early February. Under the provisions of IEEPA, Congress is allowed to cancel any presidential action—and those efforts are "privileged," which means they can be brought directly to the floor without first going through the committee process. That's important because it means Congress can respond quickly if a president is perceived to be overstepping the bounds of his emergency powers (or, as in Trump's case, deploying them in ways that have nothing to do with any actual emergency).
So, the House's new rules say that individual lawmakers can't do that anymore. They cannot bring a privileged resolution under IEEPA to the House floor for the rest of this congressional session.
When this rules package was in front of the House Rules Committee on Monday, Democrats tried to strip out the provision that eliminates the IEEPA shortcut. That attempt was defeated in a party-line vote. On the House floor, all Republicans except Rep. Thomas Massie (R–Ky.) voted in favor of it. (Massie's office did not return a request to clarify whether he objected to the tariff provision or other aspects of the rules package.)
Beyer and DelBene are upset because they have been trying to do exactly that thing. They've introduced a pair of bills to restrict presidential tariff powers, one of which specifically targets the tariff powers under IEEPA. A group of Democrats, including Delbene, have also introduced a resolution to terminate Trump's tariffs imposed under IEEPA.
All of those proposals are long shots, at best, since they would have to pass with a veto-proof majority. Still, given that's the case, why do Republicans seem worried about blocking those privileged resolutions?
The answer is likely that House Republicans don't want to be put on the spot with an up-or-down vote that would force members to choose between repudiating Trump or supporting his unpopular and irrational tariffs. By forcing bills like Delbene's to go through the committee process, they can be smothered without forcing members into tough votes.
In the meantime, the message from House Republicans (minus Massie) is clear: Trump's executive power over tariffs is not to be challenged, even when there is clearly no emergency and when he's using those powers to jerk the economy around on a daily basis. The cowardice of Congress will continue fueling the growth of executive power.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
We've got a government of laws, not a government of men (in theory). Government is supposed function. That's it. Sure there are men involved, but their job is to administer and enforce the law. The law is supposed to be the will of the people because it comes from our representatives in Congress. Our representatives have delegated MASSSIVE power to the executive by passing vague laws and letting the executive interpret them as they will. To take that power back will require Congress repealing the laws that delegated that power. What DOGE is doing is simply firing people who make government function according to laws passed by Congress. If we're going to claw back power from the executive and shrink a government of laws, the law must be changed. Why is it literally impossible for Trump defenders to understand that concept?
Everyone who argues with you on this has never said they don't want it codified. They have mostly said they are just happy for the start of the process as no other president has focused on this type of cutting. But as usual anything Trump does is bad for you.
Everyone who argues with you on this has never said they don't want it codified.
They attack me for wanting cuts in government to be legislative and more permanent than Trump's executive orders by accusing me of wanting no cuts at all.
They have mostly said they are just happy for the start of the process as no other president has focused on this type of cutting.
There is no process to start. It's just executive orders that will be undone by the next Democratic administration because the laws will still be in place.
But as usual anything Trump does is bad for you.
As usual anything Trump does is good for you, even if it's temporary and pointless in the long term.
You have the worst case of TDS in the commentariat. I swear that if Trump said the sky was blue and water wet, you’d say it isn’t and argue till the twelfth of never that neither was the case.
We know you don’t give a shit about spending. This is all about attacking Trump. Everything with you is about attacking Trump.
There is no such thing as "the will of the people" and there never has been. Even in the rare case of unanimous agreement of a group of people, it still does not represent their "will." People may agree upon what they want in terms of a goal, and they may even agree upon some actions they want someone to take, but "will" implies that they have the determination to actually carry out a plan of action towards achieving a goal. It is impossible to determine the will of the people with a poll or even a vote. You cannot determine their WILL until you see their actions.
"The “volonté générale” – the general will – seems to have been coined by Jean-Jacques Rousseau in 1755, and it appears in Article Six of the Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen in 1789, during the French Revolution" https://newhumanist.org.uk/articles/5558/in-a-word-will-of-the-people
So, congress has made it easier for them to not have to do their job? Got it.
Congress continues the process of making it easier for them not to have to do their job.
Congress is afraid of taking responsibility for *anything*, particularly difficult decisions. The electorate is fickle, uninformed and gullible. So it isn't hard for a rival to paint an incumbent Rep or Senator as whatever the rival thinks will help his own chances. On top of that, our government is literally designed to require concession to form consunsus. A Rep might vote for a bill that contains three things his constituents demand even though it includes one thing they hate. When campaign season starts (in reality, it never ends) the rival will focus on that one negative component of the bill and claim the Rep supported it philosophically, even though it was necessary to get the otherwise good legislation through.
It's a mess. And American voters are too busy watching the Real Housewives of the Mobile Home Park to pay attention to, or appreciate the nuances of crafting legislation.
Congresspeople learned long ago that vague laws will get decided in the (ideally) apolitical courts, where judges won't be fired for choosing one side or another. So Congress quit even trying. It's the dirty dildo in the dish drainer of our government. It's spinelessness that breeds spinelessness. And it forces the (ideally) apolitical judiciary to craft actual legislation that Congress is too afraid to tackle. "Activist" judges have no option but to rule they way they see fit on highly politicized laws because Congress won't. Voters don't give a fuck what their Reps do as long as they never concede *anything* to their counterparts on the other side of the aisle. Voters demand their Reps do not do what the Constitution demands them to do. Civics isn't taught in schools to any sufficient degree, and political rivals are always primed to make the incumbent look like a traitor. They system was built to break. And it has broken.
What a fine pack of pusillanimous piss ants we have in Congress this term.
Cowards. Sycophants.
This is the unavoidable end-game we have been watching play out for decades. Congress has painted itself into a corner so firmly that they no longer have any way to escape from their own previous actions, even if they had enough of a spine left to change their minds now. Both parties now see themselves in a damned-if-you-do-and-damned-if-you-don't situation of their own making. Couldn't have happened to a nicer bunch of despots! Although this point in history was arrived at without any cooperation from me and it will not do me any good at all, I relish the blood sport excitement of watching Trump take a wrecking ball to the economy AND to the massive bureaucracy at the same time while watching the Congress squirm and flounder in impotence. Ima need some more popcorn!
Shocking!!
The party in power votes to increase emergency powers. The opposition votes to reign it in
I feel like I may have heard the story before
"It speaks volumes that Republicans are sneaking this provision into a procedural measure hidden from the American people," said Reps. Don Beyer (D–Va.) and Suzan DelBene (D–Wash.) in a joint statement on Tuesday.
When they do it for climate change or gay/trans stuff, that's (D)ifferent.