Trump Insists He Doesn’t Need Republican Lawmakers to Save His Tariffs — and They’re Not Offering

Hours after the Supreme Court dealt its most significant blow yet to Donald Trump’s expansive use of executive authority, the president wanted the public to know he still doesn’t need Congress.

Addressing reporters at the White House Friday afternoon, Trump cast the Court’s 6–3 decision striking down the sweeping tariffs he imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act as a minor inconvenience — and vowed to continue his protectionist agenda using alternative executive powers. He would not, he repeatedly insisted, work with Congress to codify his tariffs through legislation.

“I don’t need to, it’s already been approved,” Trump insisted when asked about the possibility of going through Congress.

Since taking office, Trump has jealously guarded and worked to expand his executive power, so it makes sense that he would sideline Congress on tariffs. But he also likely knows that he doesn’t have the votes if he did concede that Congress has legislative authority over tariffs.

Several Republicans responded to Friday’s ruling by praising the Court for acknowledging Congress’s rightful authority over the taxing power, and it’s been clear to Republican leadership for months that including tariff language in a second reconciliation bill would be unpopular with a significant segment of their caucus.

In private meetings with conservative advocacy organizations throughout last year, senior staffers on House Speaker Mike Johnson’s (R., La.) team repeatedly acknowledged that any tariff codification effort advanced through the budget reconciliation process would likely be an extremely heavy lift within their own caucus, given the House GOP’s slim and fractious majority.

In one strategy meeting with conservative advocacy groups late last year, for example, Johnson staffers predicted that a tariff codification proposal could lose 20 to 30 percent of the House GOP caucus if it were included in a second reconciliation bill, a person familiar with the matter told National Review. One Johnson aide chimed in with an even more bearish prediction, pegging that figure as being closer to 40 percent.

Johnson’s team declined to comment for this story, though his office did issue a statement in response to the ruling that hinted at a role for Congress in trade policy-making.

“No one can deny that the President’s use of tariffs has brought in billions of dollars and created immense leverage for America’s trade strategy and for securing strong, reciprocal America-first trade agreements with countries that had been taking advantage of American workers for decades,” Johnson said in a statement on Friday afternoon. “Congress and the Administration will determine the best path forward in the coming weeks.”

Senator Bernie Moreno (R., Ohio) floated the idea of using the budget reconciliation process to advance tariff legislation despite the steep odds any such effort faces in Congress during a midterm year.

Trump, for his part, insisted Friday that while he doesn’t need Congress, he could get the votes for a tariff bill if he so chose.

“I mean, I would ask Congress, and probably get it,” he added.

It’s not clear whether Trump had seen the reactions from multiple congressional Republicans in both chambers praising the Court’s ruling.

“In defense of our Republic, the Supreme Court struck down using emergency powers to enact taxes,” libertarian-leaning Senator Rand Paul (R., Ky.) wrote on social media. “This ruling will also prevent a future President such as AOC from using emergency powers to enact socialism.”

“Today’s ruling affirms, despite all the noise of the moment, that the Founders’ system of checks and balances remains strong nearly 250 years later,” said Senator John Curtis (R., Utah) in reaction to the ruling.

Attempting to whip the votes for tariff legislation would carry major political risks for the second-term president.

First, Republicans’ success in pushing through an extension of the 2017 tax cuts last summer means there’s no crushing political deadline forcing members to get in line on a second bill. Second, GOP margins remain dangerously slim in the House, meaning any reconciliation bill would be an uphill battle for House Republican leaders, let alone a reconciliation bill that includes controversial legislative language surrounding tariffs during a midterm year. And as last week’s Canada tariff vote demonstrated, a half dozen House Republicans are willing to break party ranks to oppose the president’s sweeping trade agenda.

“They’re not good Republicans,” Trump said on Friday of the six House Republican no votes.

The high court’s decision dropped four days before the State of the Union address, which Trump is set to deliver in the House chamber on Tuesday. Supreme Court justices are expected to sit in the chamber during Trump’s remarks, though the six judges who struck down his IEEPA tariffs are “barely invited.”

“Three are happily invited,” he said of the three judges who dissented from the majority’s ruling.