Mike Johnson Wanted Congress To Reclaim Power Over Tariffs—in 2019

Asked earlier this month about the possibility that the Supreme Court could strike down President Donald Trump’s tariffs on the grounds that they are an unconstitutional delegation of congressional authority, Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R–La.) said the justices should have no such concerns.

“The President is using the authority that the people gave him—I would argue a mandate they gave him—to fix the trade imbalance,” Johnson said during an interview with RealClearPolitics. “I would have stepped in already if I felt like the executive had overstepped their authority. I don’t think that’s happened yet.”

Just six years ago, however, Johnson had a different perspective. In 2019, he was one of several Republicans who co-sponsored a bill seeking to “restore Congressional authority” over matters of “tariffs, duties, and quotas.”

At the time, Trump was in the midst of rewriting the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) into the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), which was finalized in July 2020. He had also launched the first of his unilateral tariff efforts, targeting imported steel, aluminum, and many items from China. All of that paled in comparison to the broad emergency powers that Trump has claimed during his second term to impose tariffs on nearly all imports, raising the average U.S. tariff rate to levels not seen in nearly a century.

But the more limited trade war from Trump’s first term inspired a mild backlash from Republicans in Congress, including the now-speaker.

That 2019 bill, which never got a vote, was introduced by Rep. Warren Davidson (R–Ohio), who was at the time part of the House Freedom Caucus. (He was tossed out of the group in 2024.) It was also co-sponsored by then-Rep. Justin Amash and about a dozen other members, including Johnson.

At the time, Davidson said there was a need for Congress and the president to “collaboratively address the substantial impact of trade policy on job creators, farmers, and consumers in Ohio and across the country.”

There has been no indication that the House still believes such “collaboration” is necessary, even when it comes to a core function of Congress as outlined by Article I of the U.S. Constitution.

The Senate has pushed back against some of Trump’s tariffs this year—most notably by passing a series of resolutions in late October to terminate the “emergency” underpinning Trump’s tariffs.

Meanwhile, the House under Johnson’s leadership has actively sought to avoid any conflict with the White House over trade policy. House Republicans changed the rules governing certain resolutions to prevent bills that might strike down the tariffs from reaching the floor—where they might pass, or at the very least might create some awkward votes for GOP members.

Johnson says that he would have “stepped in” to block Trump if he believed the president was overstepping his authority, but he’s actually done the exact opposite. He’s given cover for Trump’s unilateral tariffs and sweeping emergency powers by making it harder for rank-and-file members of the House to officially signal their displeasure with those unpopular policies.

It is no surprise that Johnson is doing what the Trump administration wants here. But it is noteworthy that he once seemingly held a different view about the proper roles for Congress and the presidency with regard to trade.