In a dramatic escalation of the ongoing battle over U.S. trade policy, Virginia Senator Tim Kaine announced on September 16, 2025, that he will force Senate votes on two resolutions aimed at revoking President Donald Trump’s authority to impose reciprocal tariffs on Canada and Brazil. This move, which comes amid mounting public discontent over the economy and a chorus of bipartisan concern, sets the stage for another round of high-stakes confrontation between Congress and the White House over the direction of America’s trade relationships.
Senator Kaine, a Democrat, is joined in this effort by Republican Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky, a vocal opponent of Trump’s tariffs. Together, they plan to introduce two resolutions—one targeting tariffs on Canada, the other on Brazil—by triggering a decades-old law that allows Congress to challenge presidential emergency powers. According to the Associated Press, Kaine and Paul are determined to keep the pressure on, with Kaine vowing to “put [Republicans] on the record as often as he can.” He challenged his colleagues: “Republicans can vote with your constituents or vote with President Trump. Over time, the instability is creating huge concerns.”
This isn’t the first time the Senate has tried to rein in the president’s tariff authority. Back in April, Kaine and a coalition of Democratic senators—Ron Wyden, Jeanne Shaheen, Peter Welch, Elizabeth Warren, and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer—introduced a resolution to terminate Trump’s authority to impose tariffs under the National Emergencies Act. That measure passed the Senate with support from four Republicans: Rand Paul, Susan Collins of Maine, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, and Mitch McConnell of Kentucky. However, the House of Representatives declined to act on the resolution, leaving the tariffs in place.
For states like Maine, the stakes are especially high. Senator Collins, who supported the Senate resolution, pointed out that Maine’s economy is deeply interwoven with Canada’s. “Maine receives 95 percent of its home heating oil from Canada,” she said, “and Maine farmers import 90 percent of the potash they use as fertilizer from Canada.” These facts underscore the real-world consequences of trade barriers, especially for communities dependent on cross-border commerce.
The tariffs on Brazil have also sparked significant backlash. President Trump imposed a 50 percent tariff on Brazilian goods, citing the prosecution of Brazil’s former president, Jair Bolsonaro, who was sentenced to 27 years in prison for plotting a coup. The economic fallout has been swift: coffee prices in the United States have surged by more than 20 percent over the past year, squeezing consumers and roasters alike. Critics argue that the tariffs are unnecessary, pointing out that the United States ran a $6.8 billion trade goods surplus with Brazil in 2024, according to the U.S. Census Bureau.
Despite these concerns, the Republican-led House has moved aggressively to block any congressional action on tariffs. On the same day as Kaine’s announcement, House Republicans used a legislative maneuver to freeze the calendar until March 31, 2026, effectively stripping lawmakers of the ability to force a vote on lifting the tariffs. This arcane procedural tactic—used several times in 2025—renders useless a law that would otherwise allow Congress to insist on a quick floor vote to end a presidentially declared emergency.
Representative Nick Langworthy, a New York Republican, defended the strategy, saying, “Access to the American economy is a privilege, not a right. President Trump is using tariffs as leverage to reduce reciprocal barriers, safeguard our national security and level the global playing field for American producers and manufacturers. And it’s working.”
But not all Republicans are comfortable with this approach. Representative Don Bacon of Nebraska initially opposed the measure, stating, “Article One of the Constitution grants Congress authority over tariffs, and tariffs are a tax on American consumers.” After receiving assurances from party leaders about future tariff policy, he switched his vote. Representative Kevin Kiley of California, however, remained critical: “If we’re saying that Congress is not going to be able to assert itself on this issue, that in my view is a problem.”
Democrats have been quick to condemn the House’s actions as an abdication of congressional responsibility. Representative Jim McGovern of Massachusetts, the top Democrat on the Rules Committee, lamented, “I’m continually disappointed in some of my colleagues who so often talk about the importance of Congress reasserting its role in trade, but when the cards are down, give Trump unchecked power to impose tariffs for whatever reason he wants without so much as a vote in Congress.”
In the Senate, where the minority has more procedural tools, Democrats have had more success in forcing votes. Senator Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, another backer of the resolutions, warned of the impact on her state: “The president cannot abuse his power to continue an unjustified trade war with one of our strongest allies. Canada is Minnesota’s top trading partner, but the president’s tariffs are jeopardizing that relationship, and adding costs for Minnesota families.”
Senator Rand Paul, for his part, has been consistent in his opposition to “rule by emergency,” regardless of which party holds the White House. “I have been opposed to rule by emergency, no matter who the president is, Republican or Democrat,” Paul said in an interview reported by The New York Times. He added, “It’s good to be consistent no matter who the president is.”
The economic context for these political maneuvers is increasingly fraught. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office reported last week that Trump’s tariff policy is expected to increase jobless rates, drive up inflation, and lower economic growth in 2025. Senate Majority Leader John Thune of South Dakota and other Republicans from farm states have voiced concerns about the tariffs’ effects on businesses that rely on Canadian trade. “I think everybody kind of knows my views on tariffs, but the fact of the matter is, the president ran on this,” Thune said earlier this year, according to the Associated Press.
Yet, despite bipartisan unease, most Republicans have deferred to Trump on trade, arguing that the president needs time to negotiate with individual countries. House Republican leaders have repeatedly used legislative maneuvers to shield their members from politically difficult votes on tariffs, even as some in their ranks express unease about ceding so much authority to the executive branch.
Senator Kaine, undeterred by legislative roadblocks, says he will continue to force votes every six months until the tariffs are removed. “Now it’s real,” Kaine said, referring to the tangible economic impacts. “It’s not theoretical.”
As the fight over tariffs rages on, the balance of power between Congress and the White House—and the fate of America’s trade relationships with key allies—hangs in the balance. With both sides digging in, the coming months are likely to bring more showdowns, more procedural wrangling, and, for many American businesses and consumers, continued uncertainty.
