Photo via Reason

Trump Imposes Harmful and Illegal Section 338 Tariffs Against Many Canadian Imports

Read the original at Reason ↗
Cite

Somin, I. (2026, August 24). Trump Imposes Harmful and Illegal Section 338 Tariffs Against Many Canadian Imports. Reason. https://reason.com/volokh/2026/08/23/trump-imposes-harmful-and-illegal-section-338-tariffs-against-many-canadian-imports/

Dated when The Aporia collected the article, usually within hours of publication. Check the original for its exact date and byline.

Reason · collected 2026-08-24 · by Ilya Somin

Quick Summary

Yesterday, Donald Trump imposed 50% tariffs on numerous Canadian imports through the use of Section 338, a provision from the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930 that has been superseded by new legislation. The article argues that this move is an illegal usurpation of congressional authority and will likely face legal challenges, citing previous court cases where similar tariff attempts were struck down. According to the text, Trump's tariffs do not meet requirements for invoking Section 338, and the author expects courts to continue striking down "power grabs" by the administration. The article notes that the use of illegal tariffs has caused significant harm to the US economy and relationships with key allies.
Written by AI on 2026-08-24, from this article's own text only (the story summary below draws on all the coverage).

AI analysis

Story summary

Here's a summary of the news story:

Naheed Nenshi, the leader of the Alberta NDP, has urged Premier Danielle Smith to cancel or postpone the upcoming referendum on separating from Canada due to the ongoing trade war with the US. The referendum is scheduled for October 19 and will ask voters whether they want to start the process of holding a future binding vote on separation.

Nenshi's demand was met with skepticism by some, who noted that he had previously opposed the idea of a separation referendum. Premier Smith rejected Nenshi's request, saying that the trade war was an opportunity for Alberta and Canada to stand together against the US.

Meanwhile, other provinces are also considering their stance on the trade war. Alberta and Saskatchewan have rejected suggestions that they impose export levies on natural resources such as oil and potash in retaliation for US tariffs, with Premier Smith saying that such a move would be "disastrous" and would harm not just Albertans but also other provinces.

The federal government has announced its plan to impose countertariffs on hundreds of US exports, including clothing and apparel, appliances, and dairy products. However, it has removed seafood and fish products from the list of counter-tariffs due to concerns about broader economic harms. The US has warned that further Canadian retaliation will not be tolerated.

The trade war is also being used as a rallying cry by some who are opposed to separation. A pro-unity group called Forever Canadian has seen an increase in support and interest in its patriotic lawn signs, with over 11,000 viewers attending an online town hall meeting last weekend.

Written for “Canada US Trade Dispute Escalation” on 2026-10-31, grounded in this article and the 53 other(s) covering the same event.

Story

📰 Canada US Trade Dispute Escalation
Politics · 54 article(s) covering the same event. Compare every outlet's account →

Compared with similar articles

This article reads leans strongly left and hedges 0% of its claims. Each row says how that neighbour differs.
Trump Blows Up His Own Trade Deal with Canada Same event
The Bulwark
⚖️ Leans left further right than this Hedges 1 of 6 claims
‘No more!!!’: Trump lashes out after US-Canada talks devolve into trade war Same event
The Guardian
⚖️ Leans strongly right further right than this Hedges 3 of 28 claims Outlet record 66/100
August 24, 2026 Same event
Letters from an American
⚖️ Leans left further right than this Hedges 4 of 73 claims
J.D. Tuccille: Canada can win at trade by ignoring Trump Same event
National Post
⚖️ Leans strongly right further right than this Hedges 1 of 39 claims Outlet record 60/100
Ottawa to announce retaliatory tariffs on Tuesday as Trump tells Canada to ‘fall in line’ Same event
The Globe and Mail
⚖️ Leans left further right than this Hedges 4 of 49 claims Outlet record 52/100
Canada announces 'dollar-for-dollar' retaliatory tariffs on US as high as 50% Same event
BBC News
⚖️ Leans left further right than this Hedges 3 of 29 claims Outlet record 68/100
Canada Is Spending Billions to Help Its Workers Survive Our Tariffs Same event
Mother Jones
⚖️ Leans strongly left Hedges 2 of 9 claims Outlet record 96/100
Canada retaliates in rapidly escalating U.S. trade war Same event
Los Angeles Times
⚖️ Leans left further right than this Hedges 8 of 38 claims Outlet record 95/100
Carney’s retaliatory tariffs ‘are very much a tax on ourself’: Trevor Tombe Same event
National Post
⚖️ Centre further right than this Hedges 1 of 7 claims Outlet record 60/100
The art of inflicting pain: How to select targets for Canada's counter-tariffs Same event
CBC News
⚖️ Leans right further right than this Hedges 4 of 49 claims Outlet record 74/100
How this article was measured signals, leaning charts, publisher record, byline, topics and claims

Signals How these are calculated →

Claims extracted
19
sentences that state something as happening or true
Uncertain
0%
0 of 19 hedged ("reportedly", "may", "according to")
Leaning
Leans strongly left
of the writing, not the subject · beta estimate
Publisher signals
94/100
Reason's corrections and hedging, across everything collected from it. Not a measure of accuracy.
Outlets on this story
54
Politics
Same framing elsewhere
1
articles that frame the event the way this one does
Analyzed 2026-08-24 · how these are computed

How this is being covered How these are calculated →

Article leaning vs. publisher reliability
Source leaning vs. consistency

Publisher

Reason · 43 article(s) · 0 correction(s) detected
No corrections detected for this publisher. That may mean careful reporting, or simply that nothing has been checked.

Who wrote this

Ilya Somin
24 article(s) here · 1 carrying a prediction
🔮 But I have a few additions and caveats that I will append after quoting a few key passages from Dan's post.
2026-10-30 · assertive framing · A Libertarian Perspective on the 2026 Election
🔮 Some of those who vote for the "wrong" Dan Sullivan might rank the "right" one second.
2026-10-29 · assertive framing · Creating Voter Confusion About Candidates' Names is Bad - But Exploiting Voter Ignorance About Policy Issues is a Much Bigger Problem
🔮 It also adopts a properly restrictive definition of "rebellion" (which is one of the conditions that might justify federalization of the National Guard).
2026-10-26 · assertive framing · Ninth Circuit Rules Trump Illegally Federalized National Guard in Los Angeles
🔮 Today, the Trump Justice Department filed a federal lawsuit seeking to block Alaska Senate election results on the grounds they might be influenced by voter "confusion" between incumbent Republican Senator Dan S. Sullivan and a separate Republican candidate with a very similar name (Dan L. Sullivan).
2026-10-23 · assertive framing · Trump Sues to Block Alaska Senate Election Results Because of Potential Voter "Confusion"
🔮 And I think he actually agrees with me more than the framing of his post might suggest.
2026-10-17 · assertive framing · Who Should Defend Democracy?
🔮 I would like to thank Matt for his interesting and insightful response.
2026-10-17 · assertive framing · Libertarianism and Democracy Revisited - A Rejoinder to Matt Zwolinski
🔮 [I]t seems to me that those who are fully onboard the expansion-or-bust train should have to do more than simply assert that having four new Democratic appointees on the Court in 2029 would be a self-evidently "good" thing.
2026-10-16 · mixed framing · Steve Vladeck's "Hard Questions About Court Expansion"
🔮 The court ruled that federal law does not preempt these policies, and that if if it did, there would be a violation of the anti-commandeering requirements of the Tenth Amendment: Even were the Court to find that the United States has standing and the challenged provisions are preempted—both answered in the negative above—United States' claims would still fail because the anticommandeering doctrine of the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States precludes relief.
2026-10-16 · mixed framing · Trump Loses Yet Another Sanctuary City Case - this Time Against New York City
🔮 But some would like to revive it.
2026-10-15 · assertive framing · Fusionism and its Limits
🔮 I wish there was something I could say to ease the continuing pain of the victims of the attack and their families.
2026-10-07 · assertive framing · Compendium of Writings on the October 7 War and Related Issues
Also by Ilya Somin
A Libertarian Perspective on the 2026 Election
2026-10-30 · Reason
Creating Voter Confusion About Candidates' Names is Bad - But Exploiting Voter Ignorance About Policy Issues is a Much Bigger Problem
2026-10-29 · Reason
Ninth Circuit Rules Trump Illegally Federalized National Guard in Los Angeles
2026-10-26 · Reason
Trump Sues to Block Alaska Senate Election Results Because of Potential Voter "Confusion"
2026-10-23 · Reason
Nothing else under this byline is closely related to this article, so these are simply their most recent.
All 24 articles by Ilya Somin →

Topics

Canada Canadian IEEPA Section 301 Section 338

Subjects

Canada GPE · 4× Trump PERSON · 4× Canadian NORP · 3× America GPE · 2× Donald Trump PERSON · 1× Georgetown University ORG · 1× Hoover Institution ORG · 1× Peter Harrell PERSON · 1× Philip Zelikow PERSON · 1× The Volokh PERSON · 1×

Narrative

These usurpations include the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) tariffs struck down by the Supreme Court in February, in a case I helped bring, the Section 122 tariffs invalidated by the US Court of International Trade in April (the case has been appealed, and his massive new Section 301 tariffs imposed on the bogus pretext of combating "forced labor."
framing: assertive · carried by 1 article(s) · first seen 2026-08-24
🔮 I expect there will be legal challenges to these tariffs, and those challenges will deserve to prevail.
2026-08-24 · Reason
Trump Imposes Harmful and Illegal Section 338 Tariffs Against Many Canadian Imports · assertive framing

Claims (19 extracted, 0 hedged)

Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent Yesterday, Donald Trump imposed massive 50% tariffs on numerous Canadian imports after trade negotiations with Canada broke down, largely due to the Trump administration's insistence on maintaining earlier 50% tariffs on Canadian aluminum products and other goods. asserted
negotiations → impose → products
Section 338 was a part of the notorious Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930, which gravely exacerbated the Great Depression. asserted
which → exacerbate → Depression
In a previous post, I summarized the reasons why Section 338 tariffs are an illegal usurpation of congressional authority by the president. asserted
tariffs → summarize → president
As Philip Zelikow of the conservative Hoover Institution explained in a guest post here at the VC blog, last year, Section 338 was superseded by new legislation enacted in 1962 and 1974, and is therefore defunct. asserted
Section → explain → 1962
For that reason, it has not been used to impose tariffs since at least the 1940s. asserted
it → use → 1940s
In a more recent guest post, Georgetown University trade law specialist Peter Harrell explained why the then-planned Canada tariffs are illegal even if Section 338 is not defunct. asserted
Section → explain → post
Trump's tariffs don't meet various requirements for invoking the law. asserted
tariffs → meet → law
I expect there will be legal challenges to these tariffs, and those challenges will deserve to prevail. asserted
challenges → expect → tariffs
This is the latest of a series of efforts by Trump to usurp congressional tariff authority and impose harmful and dangerous trade restrictions that damage the US economy and poison relations with key allies and trading partners, of which Canada is one of the most important. asserted
Canada → usurp → important
These usurpations include the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) tariffs struck down by the Supreme Court in February, in a case I helped bring, the Section 122 tariffs invalidated by the US Court of International Trade in April (the case has been appealed, and his massive new Section 301 tariffs imposed on the bogus pretext of combating "forced labor." asserted
case → include → labor
Courts should continue to strike down these power grabs. asserted
Courts → continue → grabs
And, as I explained in my recent Dispatch article on the Section 301 tariffs, they should learn from previous mistakes, and refuse to stay injunctions imposed against illegal tariffs: Judges can reduce the damage caused by illegal tariffs if they refuse to stay initial rulings blocking them. asserted
they → explain → them
The Federal Circuit's stay of the initial ruling against the IEEPA tariffs enabled the Trump administration to collect some $166 billion in illegal tariff payments, greatly increasing the harm caused by the policy. asserted
stay → enable → policy
Much of the harm caused by illegal tariffs—including lost sales, investment opportunities, and higher prices paid by consumers—cannot be fixed by giving tariff refunds later. asserted
Much → cause → refunds
And, as the IEEPA experience shows, even the refunds themselves are not a given. asserted
refunds → show → ?
Billions remained unpaid five months after the Supreme Court's decision, and the Trump administration is trying to avoid refunding some of the money. asserted
administration → remain → money
Blocking illegal tariffs quickly can also help reduce the damage to US credibility and relations with trading partners. asserted
Blocking → block → partners
I would add that Trump's ridiculous trade war with Canada has poisoned relations with one of America's closest and most important allies, and made traditionally friendly Canadian public opinion overwhelmingly hostile to the US. asserted
opinion → add → US
Damaging our economy and undermining our alliances isn't Making American Great Again. asserted
American → damage → alliances
💬Give feedback
🕘History 🎫Support
Terms · Privacy · beta v2.0.0
Articles to 31 Oct 2026