House Speaker Mike Johnson’s bid to block future votes on President Donald Trump’s tariffs failed Tuesday after an internal GOP revolt.

Three Republican lawmakers, Thomas Massie of Kentucky, Kevin Kiley of California and Don Bacon of Nebraska, joined Democrats to defeat a key procedural measure 217-214...

Tuesday’s defeat appears to end a nearly year-long effort by Republican leadership to shield its members from politically difficult votes on tariffs, as voters and businesses tire from the uncertainty fomented by Trump’s favorite geopolitical tool.

https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2026/02/10/congress/gop-revolt-sinks-effort-to-block-votes-on-trumps-tariffs-00775107

If any proof was needed if how unpopular Trump's tariffs are, this is it. Most Republicans really don't want to be seen as supporting tariffs by opposing this resolution which opposes 25% tariff being imposed on Canadian imports.

I don't think he will make it past the midterms, as his own GOP is fed up and starts turning against him

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/live/trump-tariffs-live-updates-trump-weighs-quitting-usmca-as-tariffs-face-house-rebuke-220551628.html

Today's vote will start with a resolution to stop Trump's tariffs on Canada, which currently include a 35% tariff on imported items such as a 50% tariff on steel, aluminium, and copper, alongside a 25% duty on non-US cars. The United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), the free trade agreement Trump has threatened to scrap, does exempt some of these goods.

Meanwhile, there is confusion over the trade deal between the US and India after the White House adjusted language around agricultural goods.

In the updated statement, the US has now removed a reference to pulses, a staple food in India.

Trump's own words may sink him regarding the tariffs.

Reminds me of the Thai expression - the climbing perch dies because of its mouth- ( it likes to swim just below the surface looking for food, thus making it easy to catch).

Trump Tariff Remarks Could Undermine Supreme Court Case

In a recent interview with Fox Business, Trump said he initially imposed a 30% tariff on Swiss imports but later raised it to 39% after a phone call with Switzerland’s leader. He said the country’s “prime minister” — likely referring to former Swiss President Karin Keller-Sutter — asked him to lower the tariff, but he disliked her tone and responded by increasing the rate.

“I didn’t really like the way she talked to us, so instead of giving her a reduction, I raised her to 39 percent,” Trump told host Larry Kudlow.

Although tariffs on Swiss goods were later reduced to 15%, critics say Trump’s remarks could weaken the administration’s legal argument that the measures were based on economic and national security concerns rather than personal or political considerations.

Political scientist Robert E. Kelly wrote that the remarks undermine claims of a true national emergency, while Rep. Ami Bera called on Congress to reclaim its constitutional authority over tariffs.

Critics say Trump’s tariff admission could tank Supreme Court case

On February 20 SCOTUS will again rule on some cases, so let's see if they will rule on the tariffs, but I don't hold my breath for it/

9 hours ago, bannork said:

Trump's own words may sink him regarding the tariffs.

Reminds me of the Thai expression - the climbing perch dies because of its mouth- ( it likes to swim just below the surface looking for food, thus making it easy to catch).

Trump Tariff Remarks Could Undermine Supreme Court Case

In a recent interview with Fox Business, Trump said he initially imposed a 30% tariff on Swiss imports but later raised it to 39% after a phone call with Switzerland’s leader. He said the country’s “prime minister” — likely referring to former Swiss President Karin Keller-Sutter — asked him to lower the tariff, but he disliked her tone and responded by increasing the rate.

“I didn’t really like the way she talked to us, so instead of giving her a reduction, I raised her to 39 percent,” Trump told host Larry Kudlow.

Although tariffs on Swiss goods were later reduced to 15%, critics say Trump’s remarks could weaken the administration’s legal argument that the measures were based on economic and national security concerns rather than personal or political considerations.

Political scientist Robert E. Kelly wrote that the remarks undermine claims of a true national emergency, while Rep. Ami Bera called on Congress to reclaim its constitutional authority over tariffs.

Critics say Trump’s tariff admission could tank Supreme Court case

Tariff rates based on the tone of voice?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think that's from the writings of David Ricardo.

Trump is becoming more and more skilled at shooting himself in the foot. He's become a regular marksman in that regard.

It's going to be tough for the Supreme Court to ignore that...rates based on tone of voice.