Democrats Are Hatching a Plan to Reverse Trump’s Canada Tariffs
Wall Street Journal
Nov-06-2026
Democrats are eyeing President Trump’s trade war with Canada as the first target in a campaign to roll back his administration’s tariff agenda, according to the party’s senior trade lawmaker in the Senate.
“There is overwhelming support for repealing the tariffs on products from Canada,” said Sen. Ron Wyden (D., Ore.), the Ranking Member on the Senate Finance Committee, who added that he was “already talking” with colleagues about legislation to push against Trump’s second-term levies after he gains control of the committee in January.
Wyden’s statement follows an election season when many victorious Democratic candidates called for an end to Trump’s trade conflict with Canada, which threatens to intensify in the coming months before the new lawmakers are sworn in. In border states such as Michigan, Maine and Alaska, the tariffs were central campaign issues, and even Republican candidates pivoted to oppose the levies in the face of voter opposition.
Even after Democrats retake control of Congress, any measure would likely need 60 Senate votes to override a filibuster, and it isn’t clear Democrats could get the additional support needed to override a presidential veto. In most cases, Congress can override with a two-thirds majority, or 290 votes in the House and 67 votes in the Senate given all members are voting. As of Thursday evening, Democrats had captured 253 House seats and 54 Senate seats.
Even so, Wyden and those close to him say the Canada tariffs are the best opportunity to flip Republicans against Trump and potentially build enough support to avert a veto—or potentially overrule it.
The Canada legislation would be just the first in a series of actions Democrats are planning to put pressure on Trump’s trade agenda.
Those on Capitol Hill say further actions could include legislation to push back on some of the novel legal authorities Trump has used to justify his tariffs, such as Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930, which underpins his Canada levies, but had never before been used by a president. Another target could be Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, which Trump invoked for the first time to impose temporary tariffs earlier this year.
In the House, Michigan Democratic Rep. Debbie Dingell said she has been speaking for months with House Foreign Affairs Committee Ranking Member Gregory Meeks on potential legislation to push back on Trump’s Canada tariffs. Massachusetts Rep. Richard Neal, the ranking member on the Ways and Means Committee—which oversees trade—said Democrats would be ready to address Trump’s “price-hiking tariffs,” though he offered no more specifics.
GOP defections
Though Trump could raise the threat of a veto on any of the potential actions, Democrats think they can encourage Republican defections by forcing votes on unpopular trade items and ultimately build momentum toward larger changes in the run-up to the 2028 election and beyond. “Ultimately,” Wyden said, “Congress must take away the president’s ability to unilaterally and arbitrarily impose tariffs.”
Whether the Democrats’ efforts will force Trump to change any of his tariffs or other trade policies remains uncertain. The power to impose tariffs still rests largely with the president, and those close to Trump say there is little indication that an electoral rebuke will slow his trade agenda down.
“The president has been moving forward on his trade agenda irrespective of the makeup of Congress,” said Kelly Ann Shaw, who served on the National Economic Council in Trump’s first term. “I think the president is just going to keep going.”
Over decades, lawmakers have surrendered Congress’s constitutional authority over trade to the executive branch, giving the president broad authority to levy tariffs if he feels national security is threatened or other nations are discriminating against U.S. companies.
Though Democrats are eager to address some narrow aspects of Trump’s trade agenda—like Canada policy—those close to the lawmakers acknowledge that their ability to rewrite presidential trade authority will be limited while Trump is in the White House. Outside of Canadian tariffs, Democrats realize they are unlikely to muster enough Republican votes to override Trump vetoes, people familiar with their thinking said, and even if some Republicans defect, simmering disagreements remain within the Democratic Party over the use of tariffs.
Most Democrats object to Trump’s more extreme uses of tariffs, like those on Canada, said former Rep. Dan Kildee, a Democrat who represented Flint, Mich., for 10 years before stepping down in 2023. However, “where we do see some disagreement is on specific, targeted tariffs and trade actions,” he added, such as levies on steel, aluminum or other national security-related sectors.
Such dynamics mean that fundamental rewrites of major U.S. trade laws are unlikely in the next two years—particularly on statutes that had been used by presidents before Trump. Those include Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, which underpins Trump’s tariffs on steel, aluminum, automobiles and other industries, and Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, the foundation of tariffs on 60 nations based on forced-labor allegations, and coming levies based on industrial subsidies in foreign countries.
“Basically every Democrat is on record against the Canada tariffs,” said Peter Harrell, former head of international economic policy on the Biden administration’s National Security Council. “Where it gets more complicated is proposals to meaningfully constrain Section 301 and Section 232,” Harrell added.
Lame-duck risks
Far from rolling back those authorities, Trump is set to expand their use. The U.S. Trade Representative’s office is likely to unveil its Section 301 tariffs based on alleged industrial overcapacity on China and 15 other economies in the coming months, likely bringing tariffs back up to levels similar to where they were before the Supreme Court struck down many of Trump’s earlier tariffs in February. The Commerce Department also could unveil new Section 232 national-security tariffs on industrial robots, medical devices and potentially other sectors.
Other dynamics at play could intensify the trade war with Canada before the new Democratic-majority Congress is seated. After Trump imposed tariffs on $20 billion worth of Canadian goods and blocked some Canadian products from U.S. shelves, he also threatened to double tariffs on Canadian vehicles if the sides couldn’t come to an agreement before January. Should that happen, lawmakers say it would add momentum to their repeal efforts.
Harrell and Kildee also pointed out that Democratic lawmakers and aligned think tanks also will be devising ways to use the same trade authorities to deliver on progressive trade goals, should they win the White House in 2028, such as raising labor and environmental standards abroad. Excitement over repurposing Trumpian trade authorities for their ends could also blunt efforts to tinker with those powers.
“Both parties like the idea of having those authorities for their president to do what they want to do,” said Blake Harden, a former trade counsel for Republicans on the House Ways and Means Committee. “You don’t have consensus on trade in either party right now, so both sides have to contend with that, and it limits opportunity.”
Nov-06-2026
Democrats are eyeing President Trump’s trade war with Canada as the first target in a campaign to roll back his administration’s tariff agenda, according to the party’s senior trade lawmaker in the Senate.
“There is overwhelming support for repealing the tariffs on products from Canada,” said Sen. Ron Wyden (D., Ore.), the Ranking Member on the Senate Finance Committee, who added that he was “already talking” with colleagues about legislation to push against Trump’s second-term levies after he gains control of the committee in January.
Wyden’s statement follows an election season when many victorious Democratic candidates called for an end to Trump’s trade conflict with Canada, which threatens to intensify in the coming months before the new lawmakers are sworn in. In border states such as Michigan, Maine and Alaska, the tariffs were central campaign issues, and even Republican candidates pivoted to oppose the levies in the face of voter opposition.
Even after Democrats retake control of Congress, any measure would likely need 60 Senate votes to override a filibuster, and it isn’t clear Democrats could get the additional support needed to override a presidential veto. In most cases, Congress can override with a two-thirds majority, or 290 votes in the House and 67 votes in the Senate given all members are voting. As of Thursday evening, Democrats had captured 253 House seats and 54 Senate seats.
Even so, Wyden and those close to him say the Canada tariffs are the best opportunity to flip Republicans against Trump and potentially build enough support to avert a veto—or potentially overrule it.
The Canada legislation would be just the first in a series of actions Democrats are planning to put pressure on Trump’s trade agenda.
Those on Capitol Hill say further actions could include legislation to push back on some of the novel legal authorities Trump has used to justify his tariffs, such as Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930, which underpins his Canada levies, but had never before been used by a president. Another target could be Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, which Trump invoked for the first time to impose temporary tariffs earlier this year.
In the House, Michigan Democratic Rep. Debbie Dingell said she has been speaking for months with House Foreign Affairs Committee Ranking Member Gregory Meeks on potential legislation to push back on Trump’s Canada tariffs. Massachusetts Rep. Richard Neal, the ranking member on the Ways and Means Committee—which oversees trade—said Democrats would be ready to address Trump’s “price-hiking tariffs,” though he offered no more specifics.
GOP defections
Though Trump could raise the threat of a veto on any of the potential actions, Democrats think they can encourage Republican defections by forcing votes on unpopular trade items and ultimately build momentum toward larger changes in the run-up to the 2028 election and beyond. “Ultimately,” Wyden said, “Congress must take away the president’s ability to unilaterally and arbitrarily impose tariffs.”
Whether the Democrats’ efforts will force Trump to change any of his tariffs or other trade policies remains uncertain. The power to impose tariffs still rests largely with the president, and those close to Trump say there is little indication that an electoral rebuke will slow his trade agenda down.
“The president has been moving forward on his trade agenda irrespective of the makeup of Congress,” said Kelly Ann Shaw, who served on the National Economic Council in Trump’s first term. “I think the president is just going to keep going.”
Over decades, lawmakers have surrendered Congress’s constitutional authority over trade to the executive branch, giving the president broad authority to levy tariffs if he feels national security is threatened or other nations are discriminating against U.S. companies.
Though Democrats are eager to address some narrow aspects of Trump’s trade agenda—like Canada policy—those close to the lawmakers acknowledge that their ability to rewrite presidential trade authority will be limited while Trump is in the White House. Outside of Canadian tariffs, Democrats realize they are unlikely to muster enough Republican votes to override Trump vetoes, people familiar with their thinking said, and even if some Republicans defect, simmering disagreements remain within the Democratic Party over the use of tariffs.
Most Democrats object to Trump’s more extreme uses of tariffs, like those on Canada, said former Rep. Dan Kildee, a Democrat who represented Flint, Mich., for 10 years before stepping down in 2023. However, “where we do see some disagreement is on specific, targeted tariffs and trade actions,” he added, such as levies on steel, aluminum or other national security-related sectors.
Such dynamics mean that fundamental rewrites of major U.S. trade laws are unlikely in the next two years—particularly on statutes that had been used by presidents before Trump. Those include Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, which underpins Trump’s tariffs on steel, aluminum, automobiles and other industries, and Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, the foundation of tariffs on 60 nations based on forced-labor allegations, and coming levies based on industrial subsidies in foreign countries.
“Basically every Democrat is on record against the Canada tariffs,” said Peter Harrell, former head of international economic policy on the Biden administration’s National Security Council. “Where it gets more complicated is proposals to meaningfully constrain Section 301 and Section 232,” Harrell added.
Lame-duck risks
Far from rolling back those authorities, Trump is set to expand their use. The U.S. Trade Representative’s office is likely to unveil its Section 301 tariffs based on alleged industrial overcapacity on China and 15 other economies in the coming months, likely bringing tariffs back up to levels similar to where they were before the Supreme Court struck down many of Trump’s earlier tariffs in February. The Commerce Department also could unveil new Section 232 national-security tariffs on industrial robots, medical devices and potentially other sectors.
Other dynamics at play could intensify the trade war with Canada before the new Democratic-majority Congress is seated. After Trump imposed tariffs on $20 billion worth of Canadian goods and blocked some Canadian products from U.S. shelves, he also threatened to double tariffs on Canadian vehicles if the sides couldn’t come to an agreement before January. Should that happen, lawmakers say it would add momentum to their repeal efforts.
Harrell and Kildee also pointed out that Democratic lawmakers and aligned think tanks also will be devising ways to use the same trade authorities to deliver on progressive trade goals, should they win the White House in 2028, such as raising labor and environmental standards abroad. Excitement over repurposing Trumpian trade authorities for their ends could also blunt efforts to tinker with those powers.
“Both parties like the idea of having those authorities for their president to do what they want to do,” said Blake Harden, a former trade counsel for Republicans on the House Ways and Means Committee. “You don’t have consensus on trade in either party right now, so both sides have to contend with that, and it limits opportunity.”
