Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, and Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., sparred during a hearing on federal judges’ nationwide orders against the Trump administration, and the Democrat dismissed her colleague’s claims of ‘lawfare.’

‘Understand this is the second phase of lawfare,’ Cruz said during the Senate Judiciary Committee’s hearing, ‘Rule by District Judges II: Exploring Legislative Solutions to the Bipartisan Problem of Universal Injunctions.’ 

‘Now that their efforts to indict President Trump and stop the voters from re-electing him have failed, they’re going and seeking out individual radical judges,’ the Texas Republican claimed. 

Klobuchar disputed this, telling Cruz the injunctions from federal judges were a result of President Donald Trump ‘violating the Constitution.’

‘Why would Trump-appointed judges …,’ the Minnesota Democrat began before being interrupted by Cruz.

‘Why don’t you file them in red districts?’ Cruz asked. ‘Why are the Democrat attorneys general seeking out left-wing, blue swing districts?’

Klobuchar claimed the spike in nationwide injunctions from district judges halting Trump administration actions are not because ‘these judges are crooked or lunatics or evil.’ And she warned that making such claims could instigate threats and violence against them. 

Cruz criticized Democrats for not sufficiently denouncing threats against conservative Supreme Court justices in recent years. But Klobuchar called that a lie, explaining, ‘We came together and got more funding for the judges and changed things so that they had more protection.’

While multiple Democrats criticized ‘judge shopping’ during the hearing, they were careful not to get behind Republican bills to end all nationwide injunctions. 

‘It’s impossible to separate the hearing from President Trump’s record in office,’ said ranking member Dick Durbin, D-Ill.

But ending judge shopping, as Democrats have proposed in the past, wouldn’t completely address the issue, said majority witnesses John N. Matthews, a law professor at Notre Dame Samuel Bray, and Jesse Panuccio, partner at Boies Schiller Flexner. He was previously the acting associate attorney general at the Department of Justice (DOJ), chairman of the DOJ’s Regulatory Reform Task Force and vice chairman of the DOJ’s Task Force on Market Integrity and Consumer Fraud. 

‘I think the incentive for forum shopping is that you think you can get a judge who can be a ruler for the whole nation. So, fix the problem of judges overreaching,’ Panuccio. 

The White House is clapping back against media reports alleging intelligence officials have been using the end-to-end encrypted messaging app Signal to send classified information, describing the allegations as ‘false’ in a statement to Fox News Digital. 

The statement from National Security Council (NSC) spokesman Brian Hughes comes after Politico published a report suggesting Trump National Security Advisor Mike Waltz and his team have used the app frequently to discuss sensitive communications on a variety of different issues. 

‘This is a clear attempt by some in media and the Democrats to obscure the simple truth: The President and his national security team are delivering for the nation by confronting our adversaries and standing with our allies to bring peace through strength,’ Hughes said in a statement to Fox News Digital.

Hughes added that Signal is ‘an approved’ messaging app, particularly as it pertains to unclassified info, ‘and any claim NSC officials are sending classified information over these channels is false.’

Questions have circulated about the Trump administration’s use of Signal since The Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg released his exposé alleging he was accidentally invited by Waltz to a sensitive group chat on the encrypted messaging app. Critics of the Trump administration have said the messages included ‘war plans’ for an attack on Houthi rebels in Yemen.

There have also been debates over whether the information discussed in the chat uncovered by Goldberg was classified information or contained ‘war plans.’  

Media reports from The Wall Street Journal, Politico and The Washington Post have claimed Waltz and his team have frequently used Signal and other public messaging platforms to discuss sensitive topics and official government business. 

‘Using Signal to send unclassified information is appropriate, and these same facts have been reported multiple times in the last few days,’ Hughes said, noting there are federal agencies that ‘automatically install’ Signal on government devices.

‘Some in NSC, like those in the media and many areas across the federal government, use the Signal app,’ Hughes added. ‘All communications are a reflection of a thoughtful dialog of those committed to the effective implementation of the president’s agenda.’

In December, before President Trump took over the White House from Joe Biden, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency called on senior government and political officials to switch to end-to-end encrypted messaging platforms like Signal.

Still, critics of the Trump administration are demanding answers. On Tuesday, Democrats on the House Oversight Committee sent letters to ‘non-principal agency officials’ who were part of the original Signal group chat that accidentally included Goldberg. 

The letters call for the individuals, who Democrats say may have ‘firsthand knowledgeconcerning the discussion of sensitive and/or classified national security information on Signal,’ to appear before Congress for transcribed interviews.

Rep. Gerry Connolly, D-Va., ranking member of the House Oversight Committee, sent another letter to Waltz Tuesday as well, demanding he and his staff stop using Google’s Gmail for official government business after The Washington Post published a report claiming members of the president’s National Security Council were using personal Gmail accounts to discuss official business. 

The letter to Waltz demanded he turn over all communications relating to official government business that he or his staff sent over Signal or other ‘unauthorized messaging and email applications and platforms.’

Waltz has taken responsibility for the leaked Signal chat that Goldberg accidentally accessed, but he also insisted ‘no classified information’ was ever discussed in the messaging thread.   

A Democrat-led resolution undoing President Donald Trump’s tariffs against Canada advanced past the Senate on Wednesday after multiple Republicans joined their counterparts in support of it. 

Republican Sens. Susan Collins of Maine, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Mitch McConnell and Rand Paul of Kentucky supported the resolution, bucking the president to do so. The final vote was 51 to 48. 

‘As I have always warned, tariffs are bad policy, and trade wars with our partners hurt working people most. Tariffs drive up the cost of goods and services,’ former GOP Senate leader McConnell said in a statement afterward. 

Senate Majority Whip John Barrasso slammed the resolution’s passage, saying in a statement, ‘Senator Kaine’s goal was not to make law. It was simply an effort to undermine President Trump’s successful work to secure the Northern Border.’

 ‘Speaker Johnson already declared Senator Kaine’s resolution dead on arrival in the House of Representatives. It will never make it to President Trump’s desk,’ he explained. ‘This meaningless messaging resolution will not stop Senate Republicans from making America’s communities safer.’

The privileged resolution was introduced by Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., and would end the emergency Trump declared at the northern border on Feb. 1. 

In a statement of administrative policy ahead of the vote, Trump’s White House said his advisors would urge the president to veto the resolution if it passed the Senate. 

‘President Trump promised to secure our borders and stop the scourge of fentanyl that’s poisoning our communities, and he’s delivering. Democrat Senator Tim Kaine is trying to undermine the President’s Emergency Declaration at our Northern Borders—a measure that prioritizes our national security—for reasons that defy logic,’ a White House official told Fox News Digital in an exclusive statement on Tuesday.

‘Under Joe Biden’s failed leadership, criminal networks, fentanyl, and terrorists ran rampant along the northern border. Today’s stunt by Tim Kaine proves once again how woefully out of touch the Democrat Party is with the American people as they use a matter of national security for political gamesmanship. The stakes are too high to reverse course; the declaration must stay in place,’ they continued. 

Kaine pushed back, telling Fox News Digital in a statement, ‘The Trump Administration’s own threat assessment report on fentanyl did not mention Canada—not even once. Trump’s order is a blatant abuse of his authority, and it is critical that Congress push back before he inflicts even more damage to our economy and to the relationship with one of our top trading partners and closest allies.’

The resolution was required to be brought to the floor for a vote, due to its privileged nature, and it only required a simple majority vote of 51 senators to pass.

Trump took to Truth Social on Wednesday to call out multiple Republicans he warned against voting in favor of the resolution.

‘Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, Susan Collins of Maine, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, and Rand Paul, also of Kentucky, will hopefully get on the Republican bandwagon, for a change, and fight the Democrats wild and flagrant push to not penalize Canada for the sale, into our Country, of large amounts of Fentanyl, by Tariffing the value of this horrible and deadly drug in order to make it more costly to distribute and buy,’ he said in a post. 

Collins revealed in floor remarks earlier in the day that she would vote in favor of the resolution.

‘Mr. President, the price hikes that will happen for Maine families, every time they go to the grocery store, they fill their gas tank, they filled their heating oil tank, if these tariffs go into effect, will be so harmful. And as price hikes always do, they will hurt those the most who can afford them the least. Therefore, I will support this resolution, and I urge my colleagues to do so likewise,’ she said. 

Paul has been a vocal critic of tariffs during his entire tenure, including during the Trump administration. He is a co-sponsor of the Kaine resolution. 

He told reporters before the vote, ‘I think tariffs on trade between US and Canada will threaten our country with a recession. I think they’re a terrible idea economically and will lead to higher prices. Tariffs are simply taxes. Republicans used to be and conservatives, in particular, used to be against new taxes.’

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney on Wednesday evening vowed to ‘fight’ the new round of tariffs announced by President Donald Trump, and said he would turn to other international partners to get through the rocky times ahead. 

‘President Trump has just announced a series of measures that are going to fundamentally change the international trading system,’ Carney told reporters following Trump’s Rose Garden announcement. ‘We’re in a situation where there’s going to be an impact on the U.S. economy, which will build with time.

‘In our judgment, it will be negative on the U.S. economy that will have an impact on us,’ he added, noting millions of Canadians will be impacted.

While Trump did not issue any additional tariffs against Canada following the 25% tariffs already in place on all Canadian imports, the 10% tariff on its energy exports and the blanket tariff on all aluminum and steel, he did announce a 25% tariff on all foreign vehicle imports. 

He also pointed out that Trump said there could be future targeted tariffs against pharmaceutical companies, lumber and semiconductors — tariffs that will have wide affect on U.S. trading partners beyond Canada and Mexico, but across Europe and Asia.

‘In a crisis, it’s important to come together,’ Carney said. ‘It’s essential to act with purpose and with force, and that’s what we will do.’

Before the tariff announcement, Canadian Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre said at an election campaign event on Wednesday that he supports ‘targeted, reciprocal’ tariffs on American goods — and if his party wins the general election on April 28 and he becomes prime minister, he would like to sit down with President Donald Trump and create a new trade deal, replacing the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement, which the president signed in 2020.
 

Poilievre also said that Canada must maintain control of its border and freshwater and protect both its automotive industry and supply-managed farm sectors.

David Adams, president and CEO of Global Automakers of Canada — a national trade association representing the Canadian interests of 16 automakers, including BMW Canada, Inc. and Nissan Canada Inc. — said in a statement, ‘Tariffs are taxes that hurt consumers by increasing costs, driving up inflation, and unfairly impacting workers on both sides of the border.’

‘Governments should look to long-term solutions to remove these tariffs, prioritizing the elimination of regulatory barriers to industry competitiveness and providing automakers with flexibilities to respond in these uncertain times.’

Reactions from European Union leaders began to emerge following Trump’s announcement that he will hit the EU with 20% tariffs on all imported goods, with disappointment, concern and commitments to continue negotiations with the U.S.

Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, generally seen as a Trump ally, said Trump’s tariffs were ‘wrong’ and warned they would not only harm American and European pocketbooks, but aid Western adversaries.

‘We will do everything we can to work towards an agreement with the United States, with the goal of avoiding a trade war that would inevitably weaken the West in favor of other global players,’ Meloni said in a statement on Facebook.

‘In any case, as always, we will act in the interest of Italy and its economy, also engaging with other European partners,’ she added.

Ireland’s Deputy Prime Minister, Simon Harris, said he ‘deeply regret[s]’ the new tariffs but said he is committed to working with Washington to end this tariff war. 

‘I must be honest tonight that a 20% blanket tariff on goods from all EU countries could have a significant effect on Irish investment and the wider economy,’ he said, noting the effects would ‘likely be felt for some time.’

Chairman of the European Parliament’s International Trade Committee Bernd Lange called for a united response from countries targeted by Trump.

‘While President Trump might call today ‘Liberation Day,’ from an ordinary citizen’s point of view this is ‘Inflation Day,’ he said, reported Reuters. ‘Because of this decision, U.S. consumers will be forced to carry the heaviest burden in a trade war.’

Lange said the EU will respond through ‘legal, legitimate, proportionate and decisive’ measures.

Swiss President Karin Keller-Sutter said her government would work to figure out the next steps.  

The U.K., along with the president of Mexico ahead of the announcement, said they would continue to work with the U.S. and would not rush to enforce reciprocal tariffs.

Similarly, Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said that while Trump’s decision was ‘not the act of a friend,’ his country would not impose reciprocal tariffs, reported Reuters. 

He reportedly condemned the U.S. tariffs as totally unwarranted and said Australia will continue to negotiate to have the tariffs lifted. 

The White House is taking a top-down approach in making sure Republicans are united on President Donald Trump’s sweeping tariffs plan.

U.S. trade representative Jamieson Greer briefed House Republican staffers on the administration’s strategy on Wednesday evening, Fox News Digital was told.

Greer opened the call stressing that Trump was ushering in a magnitude of economic change not seen since the post-World War II era.

He also said the U.S. had been subjected to unfair trade practices for decades since lowering its own tariffs against other countries in a bid to bolster global trade, Fox News Digital was told.

Examples Greer cited for Capitol Hill aides included both Brazil and the European Union, while stressing that exemptions would be made for foreign products already subject to U.S. penalties — rather than double up on the taxes.

While political communications offices often hold coordinated messaging calls on important issues, a source familiar with the matter told Fox News Digital that it was the first such communications policy call between this White House and House Republican staff.

It underscores tariffs’ importance in the Trump administration’s policy platform, as the White House works to ensure the GOP is in lock-step on its messaging.

When reached for comment by Fox News Digital, a White House official emphasized that the Trump administration has been the most transparent in history, and that the president wants to ensure his allies are armed with the most up-to-date information.

And while the vast majority of Republicans are praising Trump’s moves, some GOP lawmakers have conceded to at least some concerns.

‘I think tariffs that are equal to what they’re charging are defensible. We want a level playing field,’ Rep. Don Bacon, R-Neb., told Fox News Digital on Wednesday evening. ‘The automobile one can be messy because the parts are from all over.’

Meanwhile, Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine., spoke out in support of a Democratic bid to exempt Canada from tariffs on the Senate floor Thursday, hours before Trump’s formal announcement.

‘The price hikes that will happen for Maine families, every time they go to the grocery store, they fill their gas tank, they fill their heating oil tank, if these tariffs go into effect, will be so harmful,’ Collins said of the Canada tariffs specifically.

‘And as price hikes always do, they will hurt those the most who can afford them the least. Therefore, I will support this resolution, and I urge my colleagues to do so likewise.’

Another GOP lawmaker who spoke with Fox News Digital on Thursday, however, downplayed any longstanding concerns. 

‘I think as long as it’s a short-term tool, folks will be OK with it,’ the GOP lawmaker said.

During the Thursday evening call rallying House GOP aides, first-term Rep. Julie Fedorchak, R-N.D., sent out a statement backing Trump’s move but conceding she understood the concerns.

‘The U.S. is taking action to address decades of unfair trade barriers that have put American manufacturers, producers, and businesses at a huge disadvantage. I support President Trump’s efforts to create a level playing field and his long-term strategy to strengthen our critical domestic supply chains,’ Fedorchak said.

‘At the same time, I recognize the challenges these tariffs create for North Dakota’s farmers and producers, and I will continue to advocate for expanding market opportunities for our products as well as other policies to help counter the negative impacts tariffs may create for producers.’

A number of Republican lawmakers were at the White House in support of the announcement on Thursday, including Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La.

‘President Trump is sending a clear message with Liberation Day: America will not be exploited by unfair trade practices anymore,’ Johnson said in a public statement. ‘These tariffs restore fair and reciprocal trade and level the playing field for American workers and innovators. The President understands that FREE trade ONLY works when it’s FAIR!’

Rep. Andy Biggs, R-Ariz., a close Trump ally, wrote on X, ‘President Trump’s reciprocal tariffs are a brilliant economic strategy. Joe Biden left the United States with a whopping $1.2 trillion trade deficit at the end of his regime.’

Fox News Digital also reached out to the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative for comment but did not immediately hear back.

Trump’s plan involves a 10% blanket tariff on all foreign imports into the U.S., as well as tariffs up to 50% on both adversaries and allies.

It also introduces some level of reciprocal tariffs on countries that tax U.S. exports, though in most cases, the U.S. rate is lower than the foreign country’s.

The Supreme Court appeared divided Wednesday over whether a state can block Medicaid funding for Planned Parenthood clinics, in a technical interpretation over healthcare choices that has become a larger political fight over abortion access.

In nearly two hours of oral arguments, the court’s conservative majority offered measured support for South Carolina’s position.

The specific issue is whether low-income Medicaid patients can sue in order to choose their own qualified healthcare provider. The federal-state program has shared responsibility for funding and administering it, through private healthcare providers.

Federal law bans taxpayer money from going to fund almost all abortions, but Planned Parenthood also provides a range of other medical services with and without Medicaid subsidies, including gynecological care and cancer screenings.

Blocking the provider from Medicaid networks could effectively defund it. Given the divisive underlying issue of abortion, groups on both sides rallied outside the high court ahead of the arguments. 

The state’s governor in 2018 signed an executive order blocking Medicaid funding for the state’s two Planned Parenthood clinics, saying it amounted to taxpayers subsidizing abortions. 

Courts have put that order on hold, leading to the current case. 

South Carolina now bans abortion around six weeks of pregnancy, or when cardiac activity is detected, with limited exceptions. 

The key provision in the 1965 Medicaid Act guarantees patients a ‘free choice of provider’ that is willing and qualified. 

Much of the court session dealt with whether Planned Parenthood was a ‘qualified provider’ under the Medicaid law, and whether individual patients have an unambiguous ‘right’ to sue to see their provider of choice, under its specific language.

‘It seems a little bit odd to think that a problem that motivated Congress to pass this provision was that states were limiting the choices people had,’ said Justice Sonia Sotomayor. ‘It seems hard to understand that states didn’t understand that they had to give individuals the right to choose a provider.’

‘The state has an obligation to ensure that a person… has a right to choose their doctor,’ added Justice Elena Kagan. ‘It’s impossible to even say the thing without using the word ‘right.”

But some conservative justices questioned how to interpret a provision that does not contain the word ‘right.’

‘One can imagine a statute written as an individual benefit that’s mandatory on the states but isn’t right-creating’ for the patient, said Justice Neil Gorsuch. ‘I mean, that’s an imaginable scenario.’ 

Justice Samuel Alito added it was ‘something that’s quite extraordinary’ to give individuals that right to sue under the Constitution’s spending clause. 

The votes of Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Amy Coney Barrett could be key: They asked tough questions of both sides.

Barrett offered a hypothetical of the right of a patient to go to court over their doctor accused of medical malpractice. ‘Does it make sense in that circumstance for Congress to want plaintiffs to be able to sue?’ she asked.

Planned Parenthood says its future is at stake, noting nearly $700 million – about a third of its overall nationwide revenue – originates from Medicaid reimbursements, and government grants and contracts.

But the group notes just $90,000 in Medicaid funding goes to Planned Parenthood facilities every year in South Carolina, which is comparatively small to the state’s total Medicaid spending.

Julie Edwards, a South Carolina resident, sued along with Planned Parenthood South Atlantic, which operates two clinics in Columbia and Charleston. She has type-1 diabetes and associated medical complications and wanted to choose the Columbia clinic for its range of services, including reproductive care. 

A federal appeals court ruled against the state in 2024, concluding the ‘free choice of provider’ provision ‘specifies an entitlement given to each Medicaid beneficiary: to choose one’s preferred qualified provider without state interference.’

In a 2023 Supreme Court opinion involving care for nursing home residents, the justices concluded that a different law from Medicaid gives individuals the right to sue. 

A year earlier, the high court overturned its Roe v. Wade precedent of a nationwide right to abortion.

Several states – including Texas, Missouri and Arkansas – have already done what South Carolina wants to do by cutting Medicaid funding to Planned Parenthood and more could follow if South Carolina prevails. 

‘The people in this state do not want their tax money to go to that organization,’ said Republican South Carolina Gov. Henry McMaster, who attended the oral argument. ‘I believe the decision of this court will be that the people of South Carolina have the right to make this decision for themselves, for our state. Other states may make a different decision, but not ours. South Carolina stands for the right to life, and we’ll do whatever is necessary to protect that.’

The Trump Justice Department is supporting the state, and abortion rights groups say the issue is about patient choice.

‘Our health centers serve an irreplaceable role in the state’s healthcare system, providing birth control and cancer screenings to people who can’t afford those services anywhere else,’ said Paige Johnson, interim president and CEO of Planned Parenthood South Atlantic. ‘Government officials should never block people from getting healthcare or be able to decide which doctor you can or cannot see.’ 

One concern raised by healthcare advocates is finding gynecological and family planning services in states with limited facilities. Low-income women often have greater difficulty traveling long distances to get such quality care, a requirement for Medicaid providers.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh said he would make it his mission to bring as much clarity over when patients can go to court, which he called a 45-year ‘odyssey.’

Much of the public arguments dealt with whether a ‘right’ to sue was a magic word to automatically decide the matter.

‘I’m not allergic to magic words, because magic words – if they represent the principle – will provide the clarity that will avoid the litigation that is a huge waste of resources for states, courts, providers, beneficiaries.’

The case is Medina (SC DOH) v. Planned Parenthood South Atlantic (23-1275). A ruling is likely by early summer.

President Donald Trump announced sweeping tariffs on U.S. trading partners throughout the world Wednesday, saying the U.S. would add a 10% minimum baseline tax on all products coming in.

The Trump administration has identified what it has called the ‘Dirty 15’ as the 15 nations with the largest trade deficit with the U.S., meaning the trade partnerships by which Washington imports more from countries than those nations import from the U.S.

But the White House has also flagged what it describes as other ‘unfair’ trading practices, chiefly implemented through tariffs on U.S. goods. 

CHINA

Washington and Beijing have been in a trade war since the first Trump administration when the first-term president imposed 25% tariffs on $50 billion in Chinese goods starting in April 2018.

Beijing responded the next day by slapping reciprocal tariffs on 106 U.S. products worth $50 billion, mostly targeting U.S. agricultural products worth some $16.5 billion.

The tariff war would continue with repeated back-and-forth escalating tariffs before some tariff relief was agreed upon beginning in January 2020.

By January 2021, the U.S.-China Business Council (USCBC) found that the U.S. had lost nearly a quarter of a million jobs.

The Biden administration and China largely maintained the status quo established during Trump’s initial trade war. 

But Trump threatened to hit Beijing with 60% tariffs on the campaign trail and, by February 2025, just weeks after his inauguration, he slapped China with a blanket 20% tariff on all Chinese imports.

Beijing again responded with up to 15% tariffs on more than $33 billion in U.S. agricultural products, including U.S.-grown chicken, wheat, corn and cotton.

China’s trade deficit with the U.S. is $295.4 billion. 

EUROPEAN UNION

The European Union, which is no stranger to Trump’s tariff war, is bracing for a much bigger battle this time around after enduring metal trade spats during his first term. 

Trump has already announced a 25% tariff on steel and aluminum imports, which directly hits the European Union, the U.S.’s largest trading partner, along with a 25% tariff on imported cars, which will affect nations like Germany. 

The EU said it could impose retaliatory tariffs on the U.S. of up to $28 billion. 

The U.S. had a trade deficit of $235.6 billion with the European Union in 2024, which Trump has called ‘an atrocity.’

But it is not only the difference in trade agreements that has irked the president.

Last month, the White House said specific levies charged by various trading partners are making it ‘virtually impossible’ for U.S. products to be exported, including a 50% tax on American dairy products sold by EU nations. 

But expert Andrew Hale, a senior policy analyst in trade policy with the Heritage Foundation, explained that the dairy industry in particular has massive barriers stopping Europe from being able to lower prices to match American products.

‘They have a very, very protected agricultural market,’ Hale said, highlighting Europe’s strict husbandry practices. ‘Europeans would not be able to compete.’

Hale explained that norms like overcrowding and poor conditions frequently found in the U.S.’s poultry, dairy and pork industries in mass farming are barred in Europe. 

Animal spacing regulations and bans related to hormone injections have required a completely different type of farming that favors quality treatment of the animals versus mass production, which makes European meats and dairy products more expensive than American products and makes it unlikely that the EU drops this tax.

CANADA

The White House has also taken aim at Canada, which is expected to see more tariffs fired at it Wednesday and said it has a 300% tariff on American butter and cheese.

Hale explained that while this is technically true, it is a tariff rate-quota that was negotiated during the first Trump administration under the revised NAFTA agreement, which became the United States Mexico Canada (USMCA), and one which has never been implemented.

The massive tariff would only be used if U.S. exports exceed negotiated tariff rate quotas. Otherwise, daily sales to Canada face no tariffs under the USMCA.

Canada and the U.S. in recent weeks have entered into a tariff war after Trump announced a blanket 25% tariff on 25% on Canadian goods and 10% on its energy.

Ottawa, in return, imposed 25% reciprocal tariffs on $30 billion in U.S. goods, mostly targeting the agriculture sector. 

It has threatened to hit the U.S. with tariffs on $95 billion in U.S. imports if Trump imposes more taxes on the country’s northern neighbor.

HOW IT ENDS

‘Everyone needs to do what Israel has just done, bring down zero tariffs against the U.S. And then we can have absolute free trade,’ Hale said. ‘That’s fair, and we can all have market access.

‘When you have stupid tariffs, like tariffing stuff you don’t grow and make, that’s just basically being unfair.’

President Donald Trump is poised to unveil a massive series of reciprocal tariffs on Wednesday, when he will likely impose duties on multiple countries as part of what his administration has labeled ‘Liberation Day.’ 

Trump and his administration have long decried that other countries are engaging in unfair trade practices against the U.S., and have advocated for employing tariffs to rectify the nation’s 2024 record $1.2 trillion trade deficit. 

Despite previewing this massive round of tariffs forthcoming on Wednesday, the White House has remained reticent regarding the specifics of the potential tariffs and which countries it plans to target.

Even so, speculation has emerged about a list of countries, known as the ‘Dirty 15,’ that might face new duties.

The term ‘Dirty 15’ stems from an interview Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent conducted on March 18 with FOX Business, where he referenced the 15% of countries that make up the largest trade deficits with the U.S. However, Bessent did not cite specific countries. 

Even so, the Trump administration has given some clues and has pointed to specific countries in certain official documents. 

For example, countries that were singled out in a notice the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative posted in March for a review of ‘unfair’ trade practices included Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, the European Union, India, Indonesia, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, Mexico, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Switzerland, Taiwan, Thailand, Turkey, the U.K. and Vietnam.

Additionally, the 2024 Commerce Department trade deficit report cited the following countries as those with the highest trading deficit with the U.S.: China, European Union, Mexico, Vietnam, Ireland, Germany, Taiwan, Japan, South Korea, Canada, India, Thailand, Italy, Switzerland, Malaysia and Indonesia. 

The Treasury Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Fox News Digital. 

The White House did not respond to a request for comment from Fox News Digital requesting specifics on which countries would face new tariffs and which were on the ‘Dirty 15’ list. 

Trump has signaled that the tariffs would go beyond just 15 countries. He suggested to reporters on Air Force One on Sunday that tariffs wouldn’t just affect 15 countries, claiming that ‘you’d start with all countries.’ 

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt on Tuesday told reporters that Trump was conducting meetings with his trade team that day, and the tariffs would take effect immediately following a Wednesday Rose Garden ceremony. 

Liberation Day will ‘go down as one of the most important days in modern American history,’ Leavitt said Tuesday, and shared that Trump has talked with various countries about the potential tariffs they may face. 

‘I can tell you there have been quite a few countries that have called the president and have called his team in discussion about these tariffs,’ Leavitt told reporters. 

Leavitt also shut down concerns that the tariffs wouldn’t prove effective and would raise prices for consumers. 

Lawmakers from both sides of the aisle have voiced concerns about how tariffs would impact their constituents, including former Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky. McConnell said in February that broad tariffs would drive up ‘costs for consumers across the board.’ 

But Leavitt said the tariffs would bolster the U.S. economy. 

‘It is going to work, and the president has a brilliant team of advisors who have been studying these issues for decades, and we are focused on restoring the Golden Age of America and making America a manufacturing superpower,’ Leavitt said Tuesday. 

While details on the specifics are sparse, the new reciprocal tariffs are expected to match other countries’ tariff rates, and also tackle issues like regulations, government subsidies and exchange rate policies to mitigate trade barriers. 

‘For DECADES we have been ripped off and abused by every nation in the World, both friend and foe. Now it is finally time for the Good Ol’ USA to get some of that MONEY, and RESPECT, BACK. GOD BLESS AMERICA!!!’ Trump wrote in a March post on Truth Social about Liberation Day. 

The Trump administration has already imposed a 20% tariff on shipments from China, 25% tariffs on steel and aluminum imports, and up to 25% tariffs on certain goods from Mexico and Canada, as well as a 25% tariff on imported auto vehicles. 

Fox News’ Emma Colton contributed to this report. 

Senate Democrats signaled more challenges to President Donald Trump’s emergency declarations at a press conference ahead of a forced floor vote to undo his tariffs against Canada. 

‘One at a time,’ Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., told reporters on Wednesday when asked if we would also be introducing a privileged resolution canceling Trump’s emergency declaration in Mexico. 

‘Let’s get this one done. And if we can get this one done and succeed, then we also have to see what President Trump does this afternoon,’ he explained, referencing the president’s planned remarks on tariffs at 4 p.m. in the White House’s Rose Garden. 

‘There may be a whole new series of trade or tariff-related motions coming your way soon,’ the Virginia Democrat said. 

Kaine did note that ‘Canada and Mexico are not completely the same because of some of the issues with respect to fentanyl,’ so it’s unclear whether he would seek to challenge the Mexico emergency specifically. 

The Wednesday press conference was led by Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., to rail against Trump’s Canadian tariffs. 

‘So we’re going to fight these tariffs tooth and nail,’ he said. ‘Trump’s done a lot of bad things. This is way up there.’ 

The White House did not immediately provide comment to Fox News Digital. 

Kaine’s challenge to Trump’s Canadian tariffs will get a vote on Wednesday evening, and it runs the risk of being agreed to and sent to the White House, as some Republicans have expressed concerns. 

‘Mr. President, the price hikes that will happen for Maine families, every time they go to the grocery store, they fill their gas tank, they fill their heating oil tank, if these tariffs go into effect, will be so harmful. And as price hikes always do, they will hurt those the most who can afford them the least. Therefore, I will support this resolution, and I urge my colleagues to do so likewise,’ Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, said in floor remarks on Wednesday. 

Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., who has been a longtime critic of tariffs, even under Trump, will also be voting in favor of the resolution and is a co-sponsor. 

Trump took to social media to call out those he suspected might vote against him. ‘Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, Susan Collins of Maine, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, and Rand Paul, also of Kentucky, will hopefully get on the Republican bandwagon, for a change, and fight the Democrats wild and flagrant push to not penalize Canada for the sale, into our Country, of large amounts of Fentanyl, by Tariffing the value of this horrible and deadly drug in order to make it more costly to distribute and buy,’ he wrote on Truth Social. 

Last month, Kaine similarly forced a vote to end Trump’s emergency declaration to ‘unleash American energy’ and increase oil drilling and production of natural gas. 

The resolution was voted down, and the White House claimed Kaine wanted ‘to impoverish Americans.’

‘President Donald Trump’s executive order brings America into the future and unleashes prosperity. Senator [Tim] Kaine wants to cost the economy trillions and risk losing nearly a million jobs,’ deputy press secretary Anna Kelly said at the time. 

The White House has also warned of a likely veto if the Canadian tariff resolution is agreed to in the Senate. 

A White House official told Fox News Digital in an exclusive statement on Tuesday, ‘President Trump promised to secure our borders and stop the scourge of fentanyl that’s poisoning our communities, and he’s delivering. Democrat Senator Tim Kaine is trying to undermine the President’s Emergency Declaration at our Northern Borders – a measure that prioritizes our national security – for reasons that defy logic.’