President Trump’s Executive Order on Tariffs: A Constitutional Assessment

The Constitutionality of Trump's Tariffs

---

Published April 21 2025

Analysis by Logan Espinosa

On February 1st, 2025 President Donald Trump issued an executive order imposing an additional 25% tariff on imports from Canada and Mexico and an additional 10% tariff on imports from China. This executive order is one of many recently signed by the President during his first month in office. The order uses the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to address emergency situations determined by the executive branch, a historically influential power. According to the Congressional Research Service, during the Iranian hostage crisis, President Jimmy Carter declared a national emergency and used the IEEPA to block the property of the government of Iran and its instrumentalities. A complete list of other executive orders under the IEEPA can be found here. Trump cited the “extraordinary threat posed by illegal aliens and drugs” as a national emergency which, under the IEEPA, gives him some economic powers. Trump imposed these tariffs to hold Mexico, Canada and China accountable to stop illegal immigration and “poisonous” drugs from entering the United States. The President has said Mexico has given drug cartels a “safe haven” to “engage in the manufacturing and transportation of dangerous narcotics.” Canada was cited to have a number of Mexican cartels operating fentanyl and nitazene synthesis labs in Canada. Until this crisis is solved, these tariffs would not be lifted. Following the signing of the executive order, Trump agreed to a 30-day pause on the tariffs. According to the Associated Press, this pause came after discussions with Canada and Mexico on how both countries are now working to secure their respective borders. Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has appointed a “fentanyl czar” and launched a joint “‘Strike Force to combat organized crime, fentanyl, and money laundering.’” Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum announced she would be “reinforcing the border with 10,000 members of her country’s National Guard.” 

In the past month, a number of Trump’s executive orders have worried constitutional scholars. His executive order implementing these tariffs is no different. Much of the controversy surrounding this executive order and its constitutionality is concerning the separation of powers. At the founding of the United States the framers intended for the three branches of government to be independent of each other. Congress was intended to rule with the “power of the purse,” while the executive branch was intended to rule with the “power of the sword.” Additionally, Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution gives Congress the power “To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises” as well as “regulate Commerce with foreign Nations.” Despite this, there is a way the President may impose economic sanctions without the approval of Congress. This brings us back to the IEEPA, which Trump is using to pass these tariffs without congressional approval. The controversy here is whether or not the President has this power. Title 50, Chapter 35, Section 1702 of the US code lists the Presidential Authorities that can be used under the IEEPA. These powers include blocking transactions and freezing assets to deal with the threat, as well as confiscating property connected with a country, group, or person that aided in the attack. It does not mention the power to impose tariffs as an approved economic sanction.

Trump’s executive order imposing tariffs on Canada, Mexico and China under the IEEPA raises constitutional concerns and legal questions. While the President has broad authority to address national emergencies, the use of tariffs as an economic sanction challenges the separation of powers. As the temporary 30-day block moves closer to ending, there will be significant debate about the constitutionality of these tariffs.