Republican lawmakers do not like crossing President Trump, but they also don’t like his trade war, and several are either offering support for the courts or at least trying to stay neutral in the battle.
Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) told The Hill he was “sympathetic” to a resolution considered in the Senate earlier this year that would have ended Trump’s authority to impose “reciprocal” tariffs on the basis of a national security emergency, and he expressed support for the trade court’s ruling.
“I was sympathetic with the resolution. I wouldn’t necessarily say the court ruled incorrectly,” said Johnson, who voted against the measure because he didn’t want to take away Trump’s leverage in negotiations.
The measure failed to pass the Senate in a 49-49 vote.
Asked if the trade court that ruled against Trump’s authority to impose tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act made a wrong decision, Johnson replied: “I don’t think so.”
GOP senators mostly have stayed quiet after two courts — the U.S. Court of International Trade, and the District Court for the District of Columbia — ruled against Trump’s retaliatory tariffs, dealing his trade agenda a major setback.
GOP lawmakers predict Trump’s legal authority to levy steep tariffs to gain leverage in tariff negotiations will ultimately be decided by the Supreme Court, but they privately admit their lives would be easier if the courts put a stop to Trump’s global trade war.
Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), who co-sponsored the resolution to terminate the national emergency declaration Trump used to impose global tariffs, said Republican colleagues are watching to see what impact Trump’s trade war will have on economic growth in the second quarter.
“If we see second-quarter growth negative, you’re going to see a big freak-out up here,” Paul said, referring to the anxiety GOP colleagues feel over Trump’s trade war.
“I don’t know what the second-quarter numbers are but we’re going to see what happens in the second quarter. A lot of the tariffs haven’t really kicked in,” he added.
A Republican senator who requested anonymity to comment on the impact of Trump’s trade war on the economy said businesses want more certainty about trade and tariffs.
“There’s lots of challenges being created because of the uncertainty,” the senator said. “I’m almost always going to be on the side of Congress reasserting their authorities,” referring to Congress’s constitutional power to impose taxes and duties.
The senator said they would welcome a court decision that limited Trump’s tariff authority.
“An outcome that gives greater authority to the Congress is pleasing to me but an outcome that gives certainty to people making decisions is even more important for the shorter-term well-being of the economy,” the lawmaker said.
Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), who introduced bipartisan legislation earlier this year to rein in Trump’s authority to impose tariffs, declined to comment on the latest court decisions, telling The Hill he would let the Supreme Court decide the extent of Trump’s power.
“I don’t think I should have an opinion until it gets done on appeal,” he said.
The longtime Iowa senator said he wants Congress to reclaim its tariff authority, but he doesn’t want to pick a fight with Trump, whose lock on the Republican base is as strong as it has ever been.
“I want to recapture for Congress” the power to levy tariffs, he said. “But remember, the bill I put in is prospective, so it’s not fair to say it’s Trump I’m trying to get at.”
Grassley’s bill would require tariffs imposed by the president to expire after 60 days unless Congress passes a resolution to approve them.
Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.), a longtime skeptic of using tariffs to shape the domestic economy, said Monday that Trump has an argument, as commander in chief, that he has power to slap steep fees on imports to protect the nation from fentanyl, illegal immigration and other dangers.
“It will be interesting to see where ultimately the Supreme Court comes down,” Thune said Monday. “I think that there’s an argument as commander in chief, if it’s an issue of national security, and — frankly, for that matter — economic security. I think the administration’s got a compelling argument, but the court found differently.
“Ultimately, my expectation is it will get results, probably, by the Supremes,” he said.
Trump last week vented his frustration after the trade court issued a summary judgment ruling he lacked authority to levy tariffs and dial them up and down depending on how trade talks progress.
He lashed out at the ruling as “so wrong” and “so political” and called on the Supreme Court to reverse “this horrible, Country threatening decision, QUICKLY and DECISIVELY.”
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit paused the trade court’s order Thursday for the White House to quickly unwind the tariffs Trump announced on April 2, “Liberation Day.”
But a second federal court in D.C. also blocked the tariffs.
Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) said Trump has “a number of other authorities he can rely on” to maintain his leverage in trade fights.
Trump responded to last week’s legal setbacks by doubling the tariffs of foreign steel and aluminum to 50 percent, relying on a different law: Section 232 of the 1962 Trade Expansion Act.
The move indicated Trump’s not ready to give up the trade war, even if the Supreme Court ultimately agrees with lower courts that the president has “unbounded authority” under the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act to slap tariffs on nearly every country in the world.
White House Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett said last week that he expects the Supreme Court to uphold Trump’s legal authority to impose near-universal “reciprocal” tariffs but argued the administration could switch to other laws to justify its trade policies.
“We’ll have other alternatives that we can pursue as well, to make sure that we make American trade fair again,” he said.
Trump’s embrace of steep tariffs to gain leverage in trade talks are giving Republican senators heartburn as they watch the stock markets gyrate and hear a growing chorus of complaints from constituents.
The president’s approval rating on trade is more than 9 points in the negative, and his rating on the economy is 11 points underwater, according to the polling average complied by Silver Bulletin’s Nate Silver.
Overall, 45.8 percent of Americans approve of Trump’s job performance, while 50.6 percent disapprove, according to Silver’s polling average.
Trump has so far announced only one major trade deal, with the United Kingdom, since announcing steep tariffs on countries around the world on April 2, a bombshell that sent the stock markets reeling.
Treasury Department Secretary Scott Bessent announced “substantial progress” in the talks between the United States and China on May 11, but later in the month said the negotiations had become “a bit stalled” and suggested Trump may speak directly to China President Xi Jinping to get them back on track.
Deputy Treasury Secretary Michael Faulkender said Monday that “a lot more deals” could be announced by early July.
“As long as we continue to make progress, I think you’re going to see a lot more deals that are announced prior to that July 9 time frame,” he told CNBC’s “Squawk Box.”
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
For the latest news, weather, sports, and streaming video, head to The Hill.
