Republican defectors helped clinch passage<\/a> of a House bill this week that would overturn President Donald Trump’s tariffs<\/a> on Canada, one of the largest U.S. trade partners.<\/p>\n The rare rebuke of Trump on Capitol Hill comes as the White House awaits a ruling<\/a> from the Supreme Court on the lawfulness of its steepest tariffs, including some of the levies on Canadian goods.<\/p>\n The anti-tariff House vote will likely prove symbolic, since the measure faces challenging odds in the Senate and a potential veto from Trump, analysts said. But the show of bipartisan opposition may reflect growing concern about the levies as members approach the midterm elections.<\/p>\n The Supreme Court, meanwhile, poses an existential risk for many of Trump’s signature tariffs in a ruling that could come as soon as this month, they added.<\/p>\n Here’s what comes next for Trump’s tariffs in the aftermath of the House vote:<\/p>\n Days after Trump took office for the second time, he ordered<\/a> 25% tariffs on Canadian goods. In August, Trump ratcheted<\/a> up the tariffs from 25% to 35%. Those levies exclude a host of goods compliant with the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement, or USMCA, a free trade agreement.<\/p>\n Trump has repeatedly faulted Canada for its alleged failure to stop the transport of fentanyl into the U.S. He has also sharply criticized tariffs and other trade barriers erected by Canada that he says put U.S. businesses at a disadvantage when selling to Canadian shoppers.<\/p>\n Between September 2024 and April 2025, nearly all fentanyl seized by the U.S. came through the southern border with Mexico, according to U.S. Customs and Border Patrol, or CBP. Less than 1% of fentanyl was seized at the northern border with Canada, CBP found.<\/p>\n On Wednesday, the House voted<\/a> to repeal Trump’s tariffs on Canada by a tally of 219 to 211, including six Republicans alongside nearly all Democrats. The narrow margin fell well short of the two-thirds majority that will e necessary to overcome a presidential veto.<\/p>\n However, Democratic House members are expected to propose a flurry of bills opposing other levies.<\/p>\n In a social media post on Wednesday night, Trump warned Republicans against voting in favor of any measure aimed at overturning tariffs.<\/p>\n “Any Republican, in the House or the Senate, that votes against TARIFFS will seriously suffer the consequences come Election time, and that includes Primaries!” Trump said. “TARIFFS have given us Great National Security because the mere mention of the word has Countries agreeing to our strongest wishes.”<\/p>\n President Donald Trump speaks during an event with Environmental Protection Agency director Lee Zeldin announcing that the EPA will no longer regulate greenhouse gases, in the Roosevelt Room of the White House, Feb. 12, 2026, in Washington.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n Evan Vucci\/AP<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n Some analysts who spoke to ABC News cast doubt on the likelihood of the House bill passing the Republican-controlled Senate or, if it were to prevail, circumventing a veto from Trump. Further anti-tariff proposals would face the same stiff odds, they said.<\/p>\n “There is zero chance that any of these tariff restrictions pass the House and Senate, and get a stamp from the White House,” Larry Sabato, the founder and director of the University of Virginia Center for Politics, told ABC News. “This is purely symbolic.”<\/p>\n Still, some analysts characterized the bipartisan House vote as a signal of growing political risk associated with Trump’s tariff policies as midterm elections approach in November. The Trump administration could face difficulty limiting the number of Republican defections on similar measures, especially when the calendar moves past the primaries, taking away some of Trump’s political leverage.<\/p>\n “The White House will have an increasingly difficult time in these tariff votes,” Clayton Allen, practice head for the United States at the Eurasia Group, told ABC News, but he cautioned that the House would be unlikely to achieve a veto-proof majority.<\/p>\n A Supreme Court decision<\/a> expected as soon as this month looms over a large swath of Trump’s tariffs. A ruling against Trump could strike down his steepest tariffs, including some of the levies on Canada, regardless of where the anti-tariff bill stands.<\/p>\n After a coalition of small businesses and conservative advocacy groups sued the administration over the tariffs, the justices must decide whether Trump’s far-reaching levies on dozens of countries unveiled in a Rose Garden ceremony that Trump dubbed “Liberation Day<\/a>” comply with the Constitution and federal law.<\/p>\n The case also concerns tariffs imposed on China, Mexico and Canada, as well as a baseline 10% levy slapped on nearly all imports.<\/p>\n Trump has also imposed sector-specific tariffs — including on steel, aluminum and auto parts \u2014 which affect Canadian imports and would not be affected by the Supreme Court decision.<\/p>\n However, the ruling could impact tens of billions in tax revenue — that could have to be repaid — and alter trade agreements struck with some of the largest U.S. trade partners, including the United Kingdom and China.<\/p>\n The case centers on Trump’s unprecedented invocation of the International Economic Emergency Powers Act as a legal justification for tariffs.<\/p>\n The 1977 law allows the president to stop all transactions with a foreign adversary that poses a threat, including the use of tools like sanctions and trade embargoes. But the measure does not explicitly mention tariffs, putting Trump in untested legal territory.<\/p>\n “If the Supreme Court rules against Donald Trump, a lot of this does become moot because the tariffs won’t be in effect,” Peter Brusoe, a professor of political science and economics at the State University of New York at Delhi, told ABC News.<\/p>\n Brusoe noted, however, that the conservative-majority high court could very well decide in Trump’s favor, leaving the relevant tariffs partially or fully intact.<\/p>\n “We have no idea what’s going on behind closed doors,” Brusoe said.<\/p>\n<\/div>\nHouse bill opposing Canada tariffs faces obstacles<\/h3>\n
![\"Clayton](\"https:\/\/i.abcnewsfe.com\/a\/b3c22d4b-b4ba-4480-9a64-de92e084fc3a\/donald-trump-4-ap-gmh-260212_1770922837201_hpMain.jpg?w=375 "\\"Clayton")
<\/picture><\/div>\n<\/div>Supreme Court could strike a blow against a large swath of tariffs<\/h3>\n