Congress has 150 days to prove it still holds the power of the purse. Will it?
Recent history has shown a new (and unhelpful) bipartisanship when it comes to Congress’s role in our republic. Members from both parties who have been elected to represent districts and states stood by and allowed the president and the courts to determine major policies.
Following last month’s Supreme Court ruling on tariffs, that will no longer be an option. According to the statute that the president has used to issue new tariffs, members of Congress will need to approve them. Otherwise, they will expire after 150 days.
Though the president’s approach to trade policy is far from ideal, and expiration of the tariffs would be preferable, it would be refreshing to see the House and the Senate vote on the new tariffs that President Trump has imposed.
We should expect more from Congress, though. Yes, it should live up to its role outlined in trade statutes. But it should also use its authority to reform, replace, or repeal expansive delegations of power that have been handed to the president.
Article I of the Constitution gives the primary lawmaking role to Congress. Section 8 of that article spells out exactly what powers Congress has, and the very first one is to collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises.
Sure, partisan majorities in Congress enacted sweeping tax policy changes under both President Biden and President Trump. But over the decades, Congress has relinquished many of its powers to the executive branch, and presidents of both parties have stretched those delegations to extreme ends. The current president has simply taken the delegation of trade authority to an extreme.
The Supreme Court’s 6–3 ruling in Learning Resources Inc. v. Trump was clear. Trump overstepped with the tariffs he implemented using the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). Congress did not delegate tariff authority in IEEPA, but, with those illegal tariffs struck down, the president has turned to Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 to levy new across-the-board tariffs.
Unlike the IEEPA tariffs, which were stopped by the Supreme Court, the new Section 122 tariffs require congressional authorization after 150 days. One can hope that members of Congress can accomplish something bigger than what’s outlined in that statute.
Over the past decade, legislators have proposed bills to provide congressional oversight of the president’s trade policy, including the Congressional Trade Authority Act and the Global Trade Accountability Act. These bills attempted to reinsert Congress into major tariff decisions.
Unfortunately, Trump would veto any legislation that throws sand in the gears of his favorite policy tool.
But when the president tries to stretch delegated authorities to advance a policy without Congress, Congress should step up and vote on that policy. This applies to Trump’s tariffs just as much as it applied to Biden’s attempt at student-loan forgiveness.
If members of Congress are not willing to legislate on actions the president takes without their approval, and they are hesitant to challenge emergency declarations or the use of war powers, one might wonder what they came to Congress to do.
This is a question millions of Americans will likely be asking as they prepare for the upcoming midterm elections. Why elect senators and representatives if, when it comes to major policy questions, they’ll do their best to avoid taking responsibility?
Will the political case for Republican or Democratic majorities be made on the grounds that those majorities could empower or restrain a president?
In theory, Congress is the most powerful branch of government. In practice, it’s not always the case. Presidents of both parties regularly break new ground with reinventions of presidential authority, while Congress waits on the sidelines for the Supreme Court to determine the legality of those actions.
In 1980, when President Jimmy Carter decided to impose an oil import fee of 10 cents, Congress responded quickly. A resolution of disapproval was sent to the president’s desk. And after Carter vetoed that resolution, Congress overrode his veto.
We may never see another veto-proof majority in Congress willing to rein in the president’s use (and abuse) of power, but at least we’ll see whether this Congress is willing to play its small role defined in Section 122, come July. Mark your calendars.