The battle for Congress is over, but the fight over President Trump's tariffs is about to intensify. The intricate network of tariffs Trump has woven over the past two years may soon face its biggest threat—Democrats are preparing to unleash new legislative firepower against the Republican president's signature policies. Democrats have never hidden their plans: to launch investigations into Trump and his associates after the next Congress is sworn in; and to prepare a legislative blitz in the "first 100 hours," introducing a series of bills aimed at dismantling much of Trump's agenda. Both lines of attack will target Trump's unprecedented use of tariffs, and Democrats, following their landslide victory in Tuesday's midterm elections, have quickly identified tariffs as a primary target.

Legislative Path: Reaffirming Parliament's Trade Authority, Canadian Tariffs Become a Primary Target

Newly elected Michigan Democratic Senator stated that ending Trump's tariff regime, particularly the trade war with Canada, is something Democrats "absolutely must do immediately." New York Democratic Representative Jeffries, a likely candidate for Speaker of the House in the next Congress, made it clear that ending Trump's tariffs is a top priority. At a press conference in late August, he said, "We must restore Congress's authority on tariffs because Trump's tariffs are making life more expensive for Americans." If elected Speaker, Jeffries will accelerate the process of getting a bill reaffirming Congress's trade authority to a vote in the House. Democrats are also laying the groundwork for a tariff investigation, incorporating it into their winning campaign narrative—linking the high cost of living to what they call "corruption within the Trump circle." On October 28, House Judiciary Committee ranking Democrat Raskin demanded that Trump hand over records related to tariff exemptions, accusing him of using exemptions to provide "sweeteners" to certain industries. In the Senate, Oregon Senator Wyden, who is expected to lead the Finance Committee if Democrats take over, stated, "As long as Trump insists on imposing indiscriminate tariffs on so many products that Americans need, he is digging a deeper hole for Republicans who have tolerated his tariff spree." He pointed out, "One of the most obvious priorities will be repealing Trump's tariffs on Canada, which are raising prices and hurting communities on both sides of the border." He added that he will continue to work to ensure Congress has the final say on tariffs, preventing future presidents from repeating Trump's trade taxes. According to media reports, Democrats are viewing the Canada trade war as "the first target" of their anti-tariff efforts.

Institutional obstacles: The 60-vote threshold and veto power require Republican cooperation.

But Senate rules will constrain Democratic anti-tariff efforts. Despite Tuesday's landslide victory, Democrats still lack the 60-vote majority needed to close debates in the Senate, giving Republicans a crucial tool to block legislation even when they are at a disadvantage. Trump is also prepared to use his veto power extensively in the next Congress, a major obstacle to Democratic legislative priorities. Overriding a presidential veto requires a two-thirds majority in both houses, meaning that even with historic electoral gains, Democrats would need significant Republican support to force legislation through. Democrats may argue that passing legislation is worthwhile even if Trump vetoes it—it helps build a political narrative for the 2028 election cycle. But they may have other options. Analysts say, "In the absence of a veto to overcome the overwhelming coalition needed for a successful debate, Congress may consider other political solutions, such as attaching clauses to 'must-pass' bills or negotiating with the administration."

Current state of tariffs: embroiled in lawsuits, Supreme Court rulings, and a shift in public opinion.

These plans could further increase the legal and political pressure already facing Trump's tariffs. The administration is already embroiled in multiple lawsuits challenging different aspects of its tariff policy. The most recent, filed on October 20, accuses Trump of using Great Depression-era laws to impose a 50% tariff on a range of Canadian goods. Another case alleges Trump is attempting to recreate the near-global "Liberation Day" tariffs, which the Supreme Court ruled illegal in late February, subsequently ordering the government to return $166 billion in tariff revenue collected under that policy. Under the U.S. Constitution, the power to tax rests with Congress, not the president; for decades the legislature has delegated some power to the executive branch, but Trump is advocating for virtually unchecked tariff power, which Democrats claim he intends to reclaim. Trump has stated his intention to use his veto power to force Democrats back to the negotiating table. But regarding tariffs, it's difficult to imagine what kind of deal Trump would accept. He describes tariffs as a win-win situation, both a powerful negotiating tool and a major source of revenue. Following Tuesday's election, Trump appeared to suggest tariffs were non-negotiable. "If I cancel the tariffs—we have 3,000 factories under construction right now. Every single one of them will shut down," Trump said in a phone call on Wednesday. He has consistently exaggerated tariff revenue: before the election, he claimed that tariffs would allow him to provide a $5,000 "dividend" to every American adult if Republicans won both houses of Congress, a plan that would cost approximately $1.2 trillion; however, total tariff revenue from January 2025 to July 2026 was only about $300 billion, of which about $138 billion had already been refunded following a Supreme Court ruling, with nearly $20 billion still pending refund. Most voters do not share Trump's optimistic view of tariffs: a poll on November 3 showed that 65% of respondents believed tariffs harmed the US economy, while only 22% believed they were helpful.

Editor's Summary

Leveraging their midterm election advantage, the Democratic Party quickly made Trump's tariff package a core objective, prioritizing Canadian tariffs and the restoration of Congressional trade authority. The Supreme Court has ruled some key measures illegal and is pushing for large-scale tax refunds, while negative public opinion regarding tariffs is also exerting political pressure. However, the Senate's 60-vote threshold and the president's veto power create practical constraints, making it difficult for the Democrats to unilaterally and completely overturn the existing framework in the short term. The final outcome depends on the level of cooperation from the Republicans, the progress of the judicial process, and the room for negotiation between the two sides. This game will continue to influence the direction of US trade policy and the agenda for the 2028 election.

Frequently Asked Questions

Q: Why did the Democrats target Canadian tariffs as their primary attack? A: Canadian tariffs, especially the high 50% rate on some goods, directly drive up prices of related goods in U.S. border states and across the country, affecting the cost of everyday and industrial goods such as lumber, energy, and auto parts. The Democrats believe this harms the interests of communities and consumers on both sides of the border and is more likely to garner bipartisan support, especially from legislators in states like Michigan, which are more affected. Making it their "first target" allows them to quickly demonstrate their action and create a legislative breakthrough, paving the way for broader tariff reforms. At the same time, this aligns well with the Democrats' campaign promise to lower the cost of living, helping to consolidate electoral gains and shape public narratives. Q: What is the actual progress of tax refunds after the Supreme Court ruled IEEPA tariffs illegal? A: On February 20, 2026, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that IEEPA did not authorize the president to impose tariffs, and the related measures were deemed illegal. Customs had previously collected approximately $166 billion and has initiated the tax refund process through the CAPE system. As of early October 2026, approximately $126 billion (including interest) had been refunded or was in the payment process, covering a large number of importers. Regarding overall tariff revenue, the gross amount from January 2025 to September 2026 was approximately $497.5 billion, with a net amount of approximately $347.3 billion after refunds of approximately $150.2 billion. Tax refunds are still being processed in phases, and some final settlement items and class-action lawsuits are still being processed, which is expected to continue for some time. Q: Can the Democrats unilaterally pass legislation to completely repeal Trump's tariffs? A: It's very difficult. Although the Democrats control Congress, they lack the 60-vote majority to conclude debate in the Senate, allowing Republicans to procedurally obstruct the process. Even if the bill passes, Trump can veto it, and overturning a veto requires a two-thirds majority in both houses, far exceeding the Democrats' current seats. Therefore, substantive repeal requires Republican cooperation or advancement through additional clauses, negotiations, etc. The Democrats may use the legislative attempt itself as a political tool, accumulating an advantage even if it is vetoed, but the possibility of completely overturning the existing tariff framework in the short term is limited. Q: How will Trump respond to the Democrats' tariff challenges? A: Trump describes tariffs as a win-win tool, protecting domestic industries, attracting factory investment, and generating revenue. He emphasizes that removing tariffs will lead to the shutdown of factories under construction and is prepared to use his veto power extensively to force Democrats to negotiate. Trump has previously exaggerated the scale of tariff revenue and the "dividend" plan, but the actual net revenue is far lower than he publicly stated. Faced with the Democratic offensive, he is likely to maintain a hardline stance, linking tariffs to national security and the return of manufacturing, while using executive power to maintain or adjust other non-IEEPA tariff measures. Q: What does this tariff game mean for ordinary American consumers and the 2028 election? A: For consumers, if some high-rate tariffs are reduced or abolished, the prices of related imported goods may fall, easing the pressure on the cost of living; conversely, if the stalemate continues, the existing price transmission effect will persist. For the 2028 election, tariffs have become a core economic issue. If the Democrats successfully push for some reforms, they can strengthen their "cost-reduction" image; if they are blocked, they can continue to use this as material to attack Trump's policies. Trump, on the other hand, needs to prove that tariffs bring long-term industrial benefits. The final outcome will shape the framework of the bipartisan trade policy debate and influence voters' judgments of the ability to manage the economy.