Article content
Last year, as faithful readers will recall, the president of the United States went haywire and imposed new tariffs on Canada by unilateral fiat. And while other commentators were endlessly analyzing Canadian trade strategy and U.S. electoral politics, I was reading treatises by crazy American libertarian lawyers and asking the question “Can he actually do that?” The answer, once it got to the Supreme Court, turned out to be “no, mostly,” with a 6-3 finding against the president.
Sign In or Create an Account
or View more offersArticle content
Story continues below
This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.
Article content
The right thing to do, all along, had been to look at, to, and into American law. Most reporters and columnists like to seize upon the personal aspects of a political issue, rather than plunge into anything slightly technical, and the ones in Canada are widely guilty of making the dozy, repeatedly falsified assumption that U.S. courts will automatically do whatever Trump wants. (Of course, lots of writers south of the border make this mistake too.)
Article content
Recommended Videos
We apologize, but this video has failed to load.Try refreshing your browser, or
tap here to see other videos from our team.We apologize, but this video has failed to load.Try refreshing your browser, or
tap here to see other videos from our team.Article contentArticle content
All this is why my spider-sense tingles as I talk to Canadians in 2026 about President Donald Trump’s latest fit of total absence of mind: namely, his use against Canada of Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (the eternally controversial “Smoot-Hawley” law). This is a long-forgotten provision that explicitly allows the president to unilaterally impose tariffs up to 50 per cent in cases where a foreign country discriminates unreasonably against American products. The delegation of Congressional tariff power in the text is quite unconditional, and everyone in Canada I have discussed the new trade battle with seems to have gloomily concluded that the Supreme Court and the libertarian zanies aren’t riding to our rescue this time.
Article content
Story continues below
This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.
Article content
Why I say that Section 338 was “forgotten” before Trump swept to power in 2016, I’m not kidding around. Trump’s election sent trade lawyers scrambling to anticipate moves he might make to start trouble without having to go through Congress. John Veroneau, a former deputy U.S. trade representative, and his associate Catherine Gibson wrote a short article pointing out the existence of Section 338, which had never actually been invoked.
Article content
Their piece remains the canonical history of the section, and it describes how the FDR and Truman administrations very occasionally used Section 338 to frighten counterparties in trade negotiations. No tariffs were ever actually introduced under s. 338 before August 22 of this year. After 1949 the section remained on the books, but in a rapidly globalizing world where professionally negotiated multilateral trade deals looked like the future, it fell entirely out of official digests and textbooks of trade law. Trump’s White House might not even have known of Section 338 if not for Veroneau and Gibson’s spadework (dammit).
Article content
So what do the wild-eyed free-traders say? They definitely have a harder case than they did in opposing the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) tariffs of 2025, but Section 338, never before invoked, has never been tested in any court. In June, Philip Zelikow, a Hoover Institution historian-lawyer, staked out the position that most of Section 338 was repealed implicitly by later statutes allowing the president to take tariff action under the same circumstances, but with more procedural requirements. That explains why the provision was so thoroughly forgotten: it was forgotten because no one at all imagined it was still in effect.