“The U.S. Senate voted 52–48 to terminate Trump’s 50% tariffs on Brazilian imports via S.J. Res. 81.”
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
The statement is accurate: the U.S. Senate voted 52–48 to approve S.J. Res. 81, a measure intended to terminate President Trump’s 50% tariffs on most Brazilian imports by rescinding the national emergency he invoked to justify them [1] [2]. The vote was bipartisan with five Senate Republicans joining all Democrats, but it is widely described as symbolic because House Republican leaders have signaled they will not take up the measure and the White House has defended the tariffs [3] [4].
1. A clear yes — what the Senate actually did
Senators approved S.J. Res. 81 by a 52–48 margin, the resolution led by Sen. Tim Kaine and co-sponsored by Sen. Rand Paul, specifically aimed at nullifying the 50% import duties Trump imposed on Brazil this summer [1] [2]. The tally included five Republicans — Susan Collins, Lisa Murkowski, Mitch McConnell, Rand Paul and Thom Tillis — joining every Senate Democrat to pass the resolution [5] [6].
2. Why senators voted to terminate the tariffs
Supporters argued the tariffs are an abuse of emergency powers with real costs for American consumers: senators warned of higher prices for coffee, beef, oil and other everyday goods and framed the move as a reassertion of Congress’s constitutional role over trade and emergencies [7] [3]. Tim Kaine and others said Trump used the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to impose politically motivated levies tied to Brazil’s prosecution of former president Jair Bolsonaro — an action they saw as a patently inappropriate use of national emergency authority [4] [8].
3. The political and legal context that made the vote possible — and limited
The votes were forced under a decades-old statute allowing Congress to disapprove emergency declarations, and they follow other Senate efforts this year to check Trump’s tariff moves, including prior votes on Canada and broader global tariffs [1] [6]. At the same time, many observers and lawmakers cautioned the Senate action is likely to stall: House Republican leaders have pre-emptively blocked such measures from floor consideration and the White House has shown no appetite to sign them [4] [9].
4. Motives on both sides and the dispute over presidential authority
Defenders of the tariffs argue the president is using available executive tools to level the playing field for U.S. exporters and to respond to what he frames as foreign policy and human-rights concerns, while critics call the Brazil levies plainly political retaliation tied to Bolsonaro’s prosecution and an inappropriate expansion of executive power [3] [8]. Legal challenges to the administration’s broader tariff program are already winding through the courts, with lower courts finding limits on that authority and the Supreme Court set to weigh related questions — a parallel legal path that could ultimately undercut or uphold the administration’s claims [1].
5. Practical effect: symbolic rebuke but limited immediate change
Practically, the Senate vote sends a high-profile bipartisan rebuke of Trump’s trade approach and signals fissures within the GOP over tariff policy, but experts and news outlets uniformly describe the action as largely symbolic given House resistance and the executive branch’s stance; it does not immediately repeal tariffs on the ground absent further action that is not politically guaranteed [9] [10]. The vote nonetheless increases political pressure and sets up more votes on Canada and global tariffs, keeping the dispute over the scope of emergency tariff powers in the national spotlight [1] [7].