标签： North America

In a notable bipartisan move, the U.S. House of Representatives has passed a resolution seeking to overturn former President Donald Trump’s tariffs on Canadian goods. The measure passed with a 219-211 vote, with six Republican lawmakers breaking ranks to join a unified Democratic front in supporting the repeal.

The resolution, introduced by Democratic Representative Gregory Meeks, condemns the tariffs as economically damaging and strategically counterproductive. Meeks argued that these trade barriers have ‘weaponized tariffs against allies,’ strained U.S.-Canada relations, driven up domestic prices, and inadvertently pushed Canada closer to China.

Despite its passage, the resolution remains largely symbolic. It now moves to the Senate, where Republicans hold a majority. Even if it passes there, President Trump has vowed to veto it, declaring on Truth Social that any Republican supporting the measure would ‘seriously suffer the consequences come Election time.’ He defended tariffs as vital for ‘Economic and National Security.’

The vote followed an unsuccessful attempt by House Speaker Mike Johnson, a Trump ally, to block debate on the measure. Republican defectors, such as Representative Dan Bacon of Nebraska, called the tariffs a ‘net negative’ and a significant tax burden on American consumers, manufacturers, and farmers.

Concurrently, the legal foundation of Trump’s tariff authority faces a separate challenge, with the U.S. Supreme Court poised to rule on a case examining the president’s legal power to impose such levies. Meeks has announced that this is the first in a series of resolutions aimed at rolling back Trump’s tariffs on other nations, including Mexico and Brazil.

In a significant legislative maneuver, a small faction of House Republicans joined Democratic colleagues on Tuesday to block a procedural measure that would have preserved restrictions on congressional challenges to former President Donald Trump’s emergency tariffs. The 214-217 vote marked a pivotal moment in the ongoing power struggle between the legislative and executive branches over trade policy authority.

The rebellion was led by Representatives Don Bacon (R-Nebraska), Thomas Massie (R-Kentucky), and Kevin Kiley (R-California), who crossed party lines to prevent the extension of a prohibition on House votes contesting Trump’s unprecedented use of emergency powers to impose import taxes. Representative Gregory Murphy (R-North Carolina) abstained from the vote.

Congressman Bacon justified his decisive action in a post-vote statement on social media platform X, asserting that ‘tariffs have been a net negative for the economy’ and represent ‘a significant tax burden on American consumers, manufacturers, and farmers.’ He emphasized constitutional principles, noting that ‘Article I of the Constitution deliberately assigns authority over taxes and tariffs to Congress, yet we have progressively relinquished this power to the executive branch. The time has come for Congress to reclaim its rightful responsibilities.’

The defeated provision, embedded within a procedural vote advancing three unrelated bills, would have maintained the ban on congressional action against Trump’s tariffs until July 31. These emergency tariffs, declared throughout 2025 under the International Economic Emergency Powers Act (IEEPA), targeted imports from multiple trading partners including Canada, Mexico, China, Brazil, and India.

The legal foundation of Trump’s novel application of IEEPA to immediately implement global tariffs is currently under scrutiny at the U.S. Supreme Court. The justices heard oral arguments in November in a case brought by a coalition of small businesses challenging the presidential authority, with a decision anticipated imminently.

This development signals growing congressional resistance to executive overreach in trade policy and sets the stage for potential legislative challenges to the controversial tariff measures that have reshaped international trade relationships.

A congressional hearing featuring US Attorney General Pam Bondi descended into chaos on Wednesday as lawmakers grilled the Justice Department’s handling of Jeffrey Epstein case files and recent immigration enforcement actions. The House Judiciary Committee session, which lasted over four hours, frequently erupted into shouting matches and dramatic confrontations.

Bondi opened her testimony by addressing Epstein’s victims directly, labeling the convicted sex offender a ‘monster’ and expressing sympathy for their suffering. However, the hearing quickly turned contentious when Democratic representatives challenged the Justice Department’s management of document releases related to the Epstein investigation.

Representative Pramila Jayapal confronted Bondi about the department’s failure to properly redact victim identities, alleging that some documents contained nude images of survivors whose privacy had been protected for decades. In a powerful moment, Jayapal asked all Epstein victims present to stand if they had been unable to meet with Justice Department officials—a request to which every victim responded.

The attorney general dismissed these criticisms as ‘theatrics,’ refusing to apologize and stating she wouldn’t ‘get in the gutter’ with her questioner. Bondi defended the department’s efforts, explaining that officials were working within legislative timelines to protect victims and immediately redacting any names inadvertently released.

The hearing further intensified when Republicans joined the criticism regarding over-redaction. Representative Thomas Massie accused the Justice Department of improperly concealing names of individuals not entitled to protection, calling the situation ‘bigger than Watergate’ and spanning multiple administrations. Bondi dismissed these claims as a ‘political joke.’

The discussion expanded to include Prince Andrew’s connections to Epstein, with Representative Ted Lieu displaying controversial photographs from the files. While the images showed the royal in compromising positions, their context and legality remained unclear.

Beyond the Epstein case, Bondi faced sharp questioning about recent immigration enforcement actions in Minneapolis where federal agents fatally shot two individuals, sparking nationwide demonstrations. Democratic representatives characterized the shootings as ‘executions’ that warranted investigation, while Bondi defended the actions and blamed elected officials for obstructing law enforcement.

Committee Chair Jim Jordan and other Republicans praised Bondi’s implementation of President Trump’s immigration policies, creating a stark partisan divide that characterized the entire proceedings.