Trump’s Greenland tariffs could squeeze Hill Republicans

President Donald Trump’s threat to weaponize steep new tariffs as part of his bid to acquire Greenland could soon put queasy Republicans on the spot.

House and Senate Democrats plan to force votes as soon as next month to block the European tariffs Trump announced over the weekend, according to two aides granted anonymity to disclose private scheduling. That, for now, is likely to be the main avenue of congressional accountability as the president amps up his campaign targeting the icy Danish territory.

Democrats are waiting for Trump to file his executive order, but once he does, a resolution would ripen about 20 days later, according to one Senate aide granted anonymity to describe internal planning.

While some lawmakers have floated using the spending legislation now moving through Congress ahead of next week’s government funding deadline as a way to block Trump, leaders of both parties are wary of taking any steps that could lead to a government shutdown. And, as POLITICO first reported, Danish officials have privately urged against forcing a vote on a separate war powers authorization unless it has overwhelming bipartisan support.

But the 10 percent tariffs threatened against Denmark, France, Germany, the U.K. and four other countries that recently sent a small contingent of troops to Greenland offer a clear opportunity for congressional pushback from Republicans uneasy about the geopolitics of Trump’s audacious demands, their own free-trade views or a combination of both.

The Greenland reckoning comes as the House prepares to come off the sidelines on the gamut of Trump’s second-term tariffs. Speaker Mike Johnson has so far been able to shield Trump — and his own GOP members — from a direct confrontation over the president's aggressive levies, which have sparked private heartburn among some Republicans.

But that appears to be coming to an end. A procedural maneuver that blocked efforts to cancel prior Trump tariffs expires next week, and Republicans have no firm plan to extend the protections for the president. Already one House Republican — Rep. Don Bacon of Nebraska — says he is likely to oppose any effort by Johnson to block a cancellation of the Greenland-related tariffs from coming to the floor.

“It's crazy — they're an ally, and we’ve alienated our good friends,” Bacon said Tuesday about Trump’s move targeting the Danes and other NATO countries that have backed them.

With Republicans holding a threadbare House majority, and Democrats outnumbering them on some days, even one or two GOP defectors might be able to quash any effort to prevent a tariff vote.

Three Republicans voted in September against Johnson’s last effortto block tariff votes: Reps. Kevin Kiley of California, Thomas Massie of Kentucky and Victoria Spartz of Indiana, who could be likely allies of Bacon.

Rep. Tom McClintock (R-Calif.) also said he would oppose any effort to prevent tariff votes and doesn't support the president's plan to impose new trade levies on European countries over Greenland.

“I think that the Trump economic policies overall are having a tremendous positive effect on the economy. I think the tariffs are hurting. And when you're trying to accelerate, it doesn't make much sense to tap on the brakes,” McClintock said Tuesday.

Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.) said Trump’s plan to slap financial penalties on European allies over Greenland is a “bad idea” and that he wants to know the rationale for preventing a vote on blocking them. Fitzpatrick didn’t say how he would vote if he had the chance.

“My sense is that he’s trying to gain leverage, but I still don’t support the rhetoric,” Fitzpatrick said. “Denmark has given us full access to the country, they’re a NATO ally. There’s no reason for any of this.”

Republicans are already on edge as they await a ruling from the Supreme Court about Trump’s ability to use emergency powers to implement tariffs at will. The justices skipped an opportunity to issue a decision Tuesday, and it could be a month or more before they rule.

Rep. Jeff Hurd (R-Colo.) said the legality of Trump’s latest tariff threat over Greenland is “a question that I have not seen answered yet.” He said he was wary of allowing a president to deploy tariffs as a way to secure new territory.

“I think if it’s to address trade imbalances or trade abuses … then that’s the sort of thing where tariffs are certainly appropriate," Hurd said. “Outside of that context, I think it gets more problematic.”

Johnson largely sidestepped a question Tuesday night on Trump’s threat to use tariffs as the latest salvo in his bid to acquire Greenland. He downplayed the odds of a conflict, saying that the U.S. has “great allies” and “everybody there wants to work towards a solution together.”

The Senate is likely to pass a resolution to block the Greenland-related tariffs when it comes up for a vote. Already three Republicans — Sens. Rand Paul of Kentucky, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Thom Tillis of North Carolina — have publicly bashed Trump’s tariffs and urged Congress to take back its institutional prerogatives. Democrats would only need to pick up four GOP votes, and Sens. Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) have both been publicly critical of Trump’s Greenland threats and previously supported resolutions targeting Trump’s other tariffs.

“The way we are going about projecting power in the Arctic is costly, divisive and unnecessary,” Tillis said during a POLITICO panel Tuesday at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.

The House and Senate both voting to block Trump’s tariffs would be a significant moment — marking the first time both chambers have moved to check Trump's most controversial trade tactic. But the president would surely veto such an effort, and there are no signs he is yet facing the type of GOP jailbreak that would allow Congress to override him.

But forcing a vote stands to make things uncomfortable for those in the GOP who have tried to telegraph their discomfort with the Greenland push without fully breaking with Trump.

Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), for instance, sidestepped weighing in directly on Trump’s latest tariff threat Tuesday, instead saying that the president has “been a strong supporter of tariffs.”

“We've had a great relationship with them in the past, and there's a significant military presence,” Barrasso added on Greenland. “We need to build on that.”

House Democrats, meanwhile, are seizing on the momentum to try to squeeze their GOP counterparts.

Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.), the top Democrat on the Rules Committee, recited Tillis’ and Murkowski’s remarks during a meeting of the panel Tuesday. He pressed Rep. Adrian Smith of Nebraska, a tariff-skeptical Republican who was testifying on an unrelated bill, whether he would support an effort by Johnson to block a vote on the Greenland-related tariffs.

Smith said he would “prefer to vote on tariffs, certainly,” while adding he would need to look over any new language before making a commitment.

“I wasn’t expecting to have this discussion,” Smith said, later adding: “I’ve been on the record for saying I’m not a fan of tariffs.”

Mia McCarthy contributed to this report.