The Senate just threw a wrench into President Donald Trump’s global tariff agenda with a rare bipartisan vote, as Fox News reports.
In a stunning display of unity, lawmakers rejected Trump’s emergency powers to slap tariffs on countries worldwide, marking the third time they’ve pushed back against his trade policies.
Earlier this year, Trump invoked the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, citing persistent U.S. trade deficits as a national emergency to impose a baseline 10% tariff on global partners. Senators, however, have been grumbling about this move all year, repeatedly trying to curb the president’s authority. It’s no secret that many on Capitol Hill see these tariffs as a risky overreach, even if the goal of balancing trade is a worthy one.
The Senate’s discontent isn’t new; previous resolutions targeted specific tariffs on Brazil and Canada, with 50% and 35% duties, respectively, before this latest effort to halt the worldwide levies.
This most recent resolution, spearheaded by Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., aimed to terminate the global tariffs and was brought to a vote for the second time. The first attempt fizzled out in a 49-49 tie due to absent senators, including heavyweights like Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., who was expected to back it.
Fast forward to October 2025, and the tide turned—McConnell joined Republican senators Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Susan Collins of Maine, and Rand Paul of Kentucky to vote against Trump’s global tariff scheme. These same GOP mavericks also opposed the earlier Brazil and Canada measures. It’s a bold stand, showing that even within Trump’s own party, not everyone’s buying the tariff-first approach.
What’s fascinating here is the GOP split—usually a party loyal to Trump’s economic nationalism, yet these senators are drawing a line. They’re signaling that emergency powers shouldn’t be a blank check for trade wars, no matter how much we cheer for America First policies.
Meanwhile, other Senate bills are in play to strip Trump’s ability to impose those hefty tariffs on Brazilian and Canadian goods. But don’t hold your breath—the House has already shown it’s not keen on undermining Trump’s trade stance anytime soon. It’s a classic D.C. stalemate, with the president’s agenda hanging in the balance.
On a different front, Trump did notch a small win with China, announcing a 10% reduction in fentanyl-related tariffs, dropping the total duties from 57% to 47%. This came after a meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping, where China pledged to curb chemical flows tied to fentanyl and relax export controls on rare earth minerals critical for U.S. manufacturing.
Trump celebrated this development on Truth Social, declaring, “There is enormous respect between our two countries.” Well, respect is nice, but let’s not pop the champagne yet—cutting tariffs by a sliver while keeping sky-high duties hardly solves the deeper trade tensions.
He added on Truth Social, “We agreed on many things.” Agreement is great, but conservatives might wonder if this concession trades away leverage for too little in return, especially when fentanyl’s devastation and trade imbalances still loom large.
Back to the Senate’s global tariff rejection—it’s a reminder that even Trump’s staunchest allies can balk when policies hit too close to home for their constituents. Tariffs might protect American jobs in theory, but they also risk spiking costs for consumers already squeezed by inflation. It’s a tightrope, and not everyone in the GOP is willing to walk it.
This bipartisan vote isn’t just a policy disagreement; it’s a signal that Congress wants a say in trade, emergency or not. For conservatives who value checks and balances, that’s a win, even if it stings to see Trump’s plans derailed.
Still, the fight’s far from over—these Senate resolutions face an uphill battle in the House, where Trump’s tariff policies have more defenders. For now, the president’s vision of using tariffs to reshape global trade hangs in limbo, caught between a rebellious Senate and a divided party.
At the end of the day, this story shows the tension between populist economic goals and the practical realities of governance. Trump’s push to fix trade deficits resonates with many who feel America’s been shortchanged for decades, but the Senate’s defiance proves that even good intentions can hit a wall when the costs start piling up. Let’s hope the next round of negotiations—whether with Congress or China—yields a deal that puts American workers first without breaking the bank.
