House Republicans' tariff push raises separation-of-powers concerns among Democrats and legal scholars
Loading...
Summary
Witnesses and members debated the Trump administration's plan to impose broad tariffs starting April 2 and whether the president can use executive authority to set trade policy without explicit congressional approval.
Chairman Jason Smith convened the House Ways and Means Trade Subcommittee hearing to solicit trade priorities, but much of the afternoon centered on President Trump’s announced tariff actions—dubbed by critics as “Liberation Day”—and whether the executive branch may impose sweeping tariffs without congressional approval.
The hearing took up a constitutional question that multiple lawmakers and witnesses said merits urgent attention: what limits, if any, the Constitution places on presidential authority to raise tariffs and to enter trade agreements absent a congressional role. Professor Kathleen Clawson, professor of law at Georgetown University Law Center, told the subcommittee that Congress has an essential constitutional role in regulating commerce with foreign nations and warned that many recent “trade executive agreements” have been concluded without clear statutory authorization.
Clawson said agreements approved by Congress tend to be “more durable, ambitious, balanced, and legitimate” because they can include legislative changes and stronger enforcement mechanisms. "An agreement approved by Congress is likely to enjoy higher levels of bipartisan support and will provide greater certainty for businesses and workers," Clawson said. She urged Congress to reassess statutory delegations that allow the executive to raise tariffs without sufficient oversight.
Ranking Member Sanchez and other Democrats pressed similar themes during questioning, saying the administration’s on-again, off-again tariff threats and use of emergency authorities have created uncertainty for exporters and could amount to an improper expansion of executive power. Representative Marcy Kaptur, Representative Lori Trahan, and Representative Terri Sewell (all present in questioning) voiced concern that sweeping tariff authority would let the White House act as a de facto tax-raiser without congressional input.
Members and witnesses discussed specific statutory mechanisms that the executive has invoked or might invoke. Clawson and others pointed to Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution as the basis for congressional authority over trade and cited the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) and sections of the Trade Act as statutory authorities the administration uses when raising tariffs. Clawson suggested Congress could act by revising delegations, tightening reporting and publication requirements, and clarifying when and how the executive may use emergency or national-security authorities to impose tariffs.
Several lawmakers asked whether tariffs intended to generate revenue would tie negotiators’ hands, worsen the federal deficit, or undercut long-term deals. Clawson replied that the committee should consider both the authorities that allow tariffs to be raised and the authorities that authorize the executive to enter trade agreements, saying the two need to be reviewed jointly.
The hearing record closed without formal committee votes or new legislation. Members from both parties said they would pursue additional hearings and legislative options to reassert congressional prerogatives over trade policy.
The subcommittee invited written questions to be submitted for the record; members have two weeks to submit those questions and witness answers will be included in the hearing record.
