Managing trump:(his Tariffs… and everything else): 1) U.S. Supreme Court justices question Trump’s use of national security law for tariffs 2)How the U.S. Supreme Court’s tariff decision could impact Canada; 3)PSA opens Canadian grading centre to help ease tariffs for card collectors; 4)(Updated) Joly says Canada launching dispute process against Stellantis; 5)Carney says he told Ontario premier not to run anti-tariff ad, apologized to Trump
1) U.S. Supreme Court justices question Trump’s use of national security law for tariffs
Courtesy Barrie360.com and Canadian Press
By Kelly Geraldine Malone, November 7, 2025
U.S. President Donald Trump’s key tool for deploying tariffs faces a critical legal test in the Supreme Court — one which could upend his plans to realign global trade.
During Wednesday’s court hearing, the Trump administration’s lawyer faced pushback from Supreme Court justices over whether the national security statute Trump used to hit nearly every nation with devastating duties can be used for tariffs at all.
Trump used the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977, known as IEEPA, for his so-called “Liberation Day” tariffs and fentanyl-related duties on Canada, Mexico and China.
Supreme Court justices questioned the Trump administration’s lawyer Wednesday over the fact that the text of IEEPA does not mention tariffs, and asked him how the president could use the law to tax American citizens.
The U.S. Constitution reserves power over taxation and tariffs for Congress.
Jeffrey Schwab of the Liberty Justice Center, which is representing small businesses in the court hearing, has said Congress would not have intended to hand unrestricted tariff powers to the president.
“The president says that he can impose tariffs on any country, at any rate, at any time, for any reason. That essentially means that he’s saying IEEPA is a blank cheque,” Schwab said in a call with journalists last week. “That can’t be what IEEPA means.”
In a recent post on social media, Trump called the hearing “one of the most important in the History of the Country.”
The president has argued that if he is not allowed to use IEEPA for tariffs, the United States “will be at a major disadvantage against all other Countries throughout the World, especially the ‘Majors.'” Trump posted on social media Sunday that it would leave America defenceless and cause “the ruination of our Nation.”
“The only people fighting us are Foreign Countries who for years have taken advantage of us, those who hate our Country and, the Democrats, because our numbers are insurmountably good,” Trump posted.
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said Tuesday that the Trump administration is confident in its legal arguments and optimistic the court will “do the right thing.”
The Supreme Court justices will have to parse the language in IEEPA, particularly the wording about the president’s “power to regulate importation,” said Tim Brightbill, a partner in Washington-based Wiley Rein LLP’s international trade practice and a professor at Georgetown University’s law school.
Trump’s team is arguing the power to impose tariffs is clearly encompassed in that phrase, while the lawyers opposing the duties say IEEPA was never intended for wide-ranging levies.
Justices will also consider the major questions doctrine — a legal principle requiring clear congressional authorization on economically or politically significant issues — and the non-delegation doctrine, a principle that prohibits Congress from ceding its legislative power to other branches of government.
If IEEPA were to allow for tariffs, Brightbill said, the court would also consider whether Trump’s use of the duties actually deals with the emergencies he’s citing.
The president hit most of the world with so-called “reciprocal” tariffs after declaring an emergency over trade deficits. Experts and economists have pushed back, saying trade deficits do not constitute an emergency.
Trump hit Canada with 25 per cent economywide tariffs in March by declaring an emergency at the northern border related to the flow of deadly fentanyl. These tariffs don’t apply to goods compliant under the Canada-U.S-Mexico Agreement on trade, known as CUSMA.
U.S government data shows a minuscule volume of fentanyl is seized at the northern border compared to the volumes seized at the United States’ border with Mexico.
Despite Ottawa introducing border security measures to address Trump’s fentanyl concerns, the president boosted those duties to 35 per cent in August as trade negotiations between the two countries deteriorated.
Prime Minister Mark Carney seemed to steady bilateral relations during a White House visit last month — but Trump again suspended talks after Ontario sponsored a TV ad quoting former president Ronald Reagan criticizing tariffs. Trump threatened an additional 10 per cent duty and claimed Canada was trying to influence the Supreme Court ahead of Wednesday’s hearing.
The ever-shifting tariff threat facing Canada would diminish if the court rules against Trump’s use of IEEPA, but Leavitt said “the White House is always preparing for plan B.” Trump has other tools he could deploy in his quest to realign global trade, but they would require more restraint.
America’s top court could have until June to issue a ruling but it’s expected to come much sooner.
The Supreme Court’s decision will not affect Trump’s expanding use of tariffs under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 — tariffs that are already hammering Canada’s steel, aluminum, automobile, lumber and copper industries.
“There are clearly a variety of other tariff tools in the tool box and it seems quite clear to me that tariffs are a cornerstone of this administration’s economic policy,” Brightbill said.
“And so, they are most likely very ready to pivot to another strategy or strategies if the court rules against these IEEPA tariffs.”
2) How the U.S. Supreme Court’s tariff decision could impact Canada
Courtesy Barrie360.com and Canadian Press
By Kelly Geraldine Malone, Nov. 2, 2025.
Donald Trump’s tariff agenda is set to face a major legal hurdle in the U.S. Supreme Court this week but no matter the ruling, it will not spare Canada from all of the president’s devastating duties.
The U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments Wednesday from businesses and states that say Trump’s use of a national security statute — the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977 — to hit nearly every nation with tariffs is illegal.
The hearing will combine two cases: one pushing back on what are usually referred to as Trump’s reciprocal tariffs and the other which also argues against the fentanyl-related duties on Canada, Mexico and China.
It will not impact Trump’s expanding use of tariffs under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 that is already hammering Canada’s steel, aluminum, automobile, lumber and copper industries.
Prime Minister Mark Carney has repeatedly cautioned Canadians that it’s likely some level of tariff will remain even as his Liberal government negotiates an agreement with the Trump administration.
While there appears to be a worldwide acceptance that Trump has fundamentally changed global trade, nations, including Canada, will be watching closely to see if the president’s favourite tariff tool will survive judicial challenge.
Lawyers representing the businesses say they will argue in America’s top court that the act, usually referred to by the acronym IEEPA, was never intended to give the president wide-ranging powers over duties.
The U.S. Constitution gives the power of taxes and tariffs to Congress. IEEPA does give the U.S. president authority to control economic transactions after declaring an emergency but it doesn’t include the word “tariff” or any synonyms.
Lawyers say they will also argue that even if the Supreme Court rules IEEPA can be used for tariffs, the statute requires it must be in response to an unusual and extraordinary threat. They say trade deficits — which Trump used as the basis for his “Liberation Day” duties — do not amount to an extraordinary threat.
But the court could issue a split ruling because the fentanyl-related tariffs are based on a slightly different legal theory, said Stanford Law School professor Michael McConnell.
The Supreme Court could uphold Trump’s fentanyl emergency and therefore the economywide duties on Canada.
Carlo Dade, director of international policy and the New North America Initiative at the University of Calgary’s School of Public Policy, said if the court strikes down the reciprocal tariffs but upholds the fentanyl duties, Canada will be in a difficult position globally.
“If the fentanyl tariffs stay, then we’re stuck with the anytime, anywhere, anyhow tariffs,” Dade said. “And that … weakens us uniquely globally.”
Trump hit Canada with 25 per cent economywide tariffs in March by declaring an emergency at the northern border related to the flow of deadly fentanyl. These tariffs don’t apply to goods compliant under the Canada-U.S-Mexico Agreement on trade, known as CUSMA.
U.S government data shows a minuscule volume of fentanyl is seized at the northern border compared to the United States border with Mexico. Ottawa, however, took action to appease Trump’s concerns — appointing a “Fentanyl Czar,” introducing border security legislation and putting more helicopters and drones in the air.
Negotiations with the Trump administration continued to be rocky and the president boosted duties on Canada to 35 per cent in August, claiming Ottawa failed to co-operate in curbing the flow of fentanyl.
Carney seemed to steady bilateral relations during a White House visit in October. The prime minister has said the CUSMA carveout for the fentanyl-related duties puts Canada in a more desirable position than most other nations and Canadian officials were focused on lessening the impact of Trump’s sector-specific duties.
Carney has said there was progress in trade talks but an Ontario-sponsored advertisement quoting former president Ronald Reagan once again turned Trump’s ire north. The president terminated trade talks, alleging that Canada was trying to influence the Supreme Court ahead of this week’s hearing.
Dade said no matter the outcome of the hearing, Canada will be facing tariffs.
If the fentanyl-related duties do fall, Dade said, it will change the crisis in Canada caused by Trump’s tariffs. Currently, when Trump changes his mind on tariffs it can impact the entire Canadian economy and “everyone is scrambling,” Dade said.
“If you move to a 232 regime, then the president has to pick a category. He has to file for an investigation,” Dade said. “The investigation has to go through.”
Dade also noted that Trump has other tools he can use to impose economywide duties on other countries, but those statutes are more restrained and limited. Either way, he said Canada has to be prepared.
“The Americans are attempting to rewrite global trade rules,” Dade said. “We’re suffering, everyone else is suffering, but we’re gonna have to come up with something else.”
3)PSA opens Canadian grading centre to help ease tariffs for card collectors
Courtesy Barrie360.com and Canadian Press
By John Chidley-Hill, Nov. 5, 2025.
The trade war between Canada and the United States has made collecting sports memorabilia, like trading cards, an even more expensive hobby.
But Professional Sports Authenticator, the world’s leading collectibles grader and authenticator, has found a solution to cover some of those expenses.
PSA Canada has opened a new grading centre in Mississauga, Ont., that will allow Canadian collectors to bypass some of the tariff-based expenses that hobbyists have faced in 2025.
PSA, based in California, had announced in April that it would no longer accept direct submissions from Canadian collectors.
“We were trying to eliminate friction points for our customers, and we’ve had all these different friction points, but when the tariffs were announced, that was the biggest friction point we had,” said Brad Hartlin, PSA Canada’s general manager.
Grading is a process where a third-party business examines a card or collectible, evaluates its blemishes, then seals it in a hard plastic shell with a certification. This not only protects the card, it increases its value since it has been assigned a score on a scale of one to 10 on how well preserved it is.
Hartlin said that the company had been planning to open the new facility for approximately 18 months, about half a year before U.S. President Donald Trump’s tariffs sparked the current economic tensions between the two countries. Those tariffs and Canada’s counter-tariffs meant that individuals sending their collectibles across the border to be graded were being hit with fees on both legs of the shipment.
The new PSA Canada grading centre means Canadians will be able to submit trading cards, tickets, coins, card packs and more for grading, without having to deal with customs or duties by bundling multiple collectors’ prized possessions together under one temporary import bond.
“Even our larger customers, it didn’t make economical sense for them to do that. Now we take that on us,” said Hartlin. “I don’t want to say it’s a seamless process, but we’re getting pretty good at it.
“The orders go in, they come back, and that way the customer doesn’t have to worry about tariffs at all.”
A temporary import bond is a guarantee to both the Canadian and American governments that the goods being sent across the border will return. Individual collectors or stores sending their goods to be graded in the U.S. — by PSA or one of its competitors — would have to pay duties each time their package crossed the border unless they arranged their own TIB, a process that’s not financially viable except at the largest scale.
“They’re just going in for a certain service (grading). We can’t leave them, we can’t vault the cards, we can’t sell the cards there,” said Hartlin. “Every item that goes into the U.S. has to come back to Canada under this TIB.
“It’s a big process and a big undertaking for us. You have to list every individual card out. You have to go through the whole process with your (import) broker. It’s a lot of work and a lot of money as well.”
There are 16 pre-existing authorized PSA partners across Canada, who will continue to provide grading services. PSA Canada’s headquarters were originally based in Halifax but they could not offer the grading service.
Now the authorized partners, the Halifax office and the Mississauga location can all offer the grading service.
“We chose Mississauga because it’s right across the street from the airport, so customers can fly in, drop cards off, they can pick cards up, etc., from across the country and internationally as well,” said Hartlin. “Also, another one of the reasons is we have the Sports Card Expo, which is twice a year, and it’s 10 minutes away from our office.
“It’s the biggest show in Canada, by far. I think it might be, even be the second or third biggest show in the world.”
The Sport Card Expo runs from Thursday to Sunday at The International Centre in Mississauga.
4)(Updated) Joly says Canada launching dispute process against Stellantis
Courtesy Barrie360.com and Canadian Press
By Kyle Duggan, Nov. 3, 2025.
Ottawa is launching a dispute resolution process against Stellantis over the company’s decision to move planned vehicle production from its Brampton, Ont. plant to the U.S., Industry Minister Mélanie Joly said Monday.
Joly told the House of Commons industry committee she sent the company a letter informing it Ottawa is initiating the formal, 30-day settlement process to “recover” taxpayer funds and “bring back production” to the Brampton facility.
“These actions are not symbolic,” Joly told the committee in French. “They are the direct consequence of the violation of clear commitments.”
Stellantis announced last month it is moving planned production of its Jeep Compass from Brampton to Illinois, which prompted the federal government to threaten legal action.
Ottawa argues the move by Stellantis breached federal contracts tied to manufacturing in Brampton and Windsor.
The move by the multinational auto giant is happening as U.S. President Donald Trump seeks to use tariffs to pillage key Canadian economic sectors, such as automotive and steel, and pull manufacturing jobs into the U.S.
Some 3,000 workers remain furloughed at the Brampton plant; they were laid off while the company was revamping its facility to prepare for the new production line. That work has been on pause since February.
“If the Brampton facility ceases its production, there will be a violation of a contract,” Joly said, after Conservative MP Rachel Dancho pressed her for details.
Joly was grilled by MPs over documents detailing federal funding agreements tied to Stellantis.
One is a $15-billion special contribution agreement between NextStar Energy and the federal government for a battery plant for electric vehicles; a third of the money is supposed to come from the Ontario government, with the remaining two-thirds coming from the federal government. NextStar is a joint venture between LG Energy Solution and Stellantis.
Another agreement sets out how the federal government would provide NextStar with some $500 million in funding through the strategic innovation fund.
Quizzed on funding agreement details in a series of testy exchanges, Joly said the strategic innovation fund agreement ties federal support to manufacturing in Windsor and Brampton, but she did not elaborate.
High-level bureaucrats from Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada refused to explain anything to the committee about job commitments in the agreements, adding that Ottawa must first clear the release of that information with Stellantis.
“There’s commercial confidential clauses in various agreements that I’m not at liberty of sharing the details of today,” said Deputy Minister Philip Jennings. He also said the department is in discussions with Stellantis about disclosing as much of those agreements as possible.
The federal government has dispersed about $42 million to NextStar — significantly less than the $15 billion figure — said Charles Vincent, a senior assistant deputy minister in the department. He told the committee the $15-billion figure is linked to sales of battery cells and modules, but the Windsor facility has not yet started making the cells.
Conservative MPs expressed frustration throughout the hearing over the lack of specifics after Ottawa promised billions of dollars in subsidies to a foreign company that is now offshoring production.
Conservative MP Brad Vis asked Jennings if the “sweetheart deal” Ottawa signed with NextStar was “the worst policy blunder in the history of Canada.”
The company’s president, Jeff Hines, testified last week that the company’s decision to move its Jeep production out of Canada was “not taken lightly.”
Hines told the committee his company is looking at options to bring laid-off workers back to their jobs.
Joly said she is working closely with labour unions such as Unifor — something unusual for a federal industry minister, who normally interfaces mostly with businesses. And she said she has Vic Fedeli, Ontario’s economic development minister, on “speed dial” because the auto sector that forms “the very backbone of the Ontario economy” is at stake.
“If we don’t fight for all of these jobs and for the auto industry, it will have an impact, yes, on Ontario, but as a Quebecer I understand it will have an impact on the rest of the country,” Joly said.
5)Carney says he told Ontario premier not to run anti-tariff ad, apologized to Trump
Courtesy Barrie360.com and Canadian Press
By Sarah Ritchie, November 1, 2025
Prime Minister Mark Carney says he told Ontario Premier Doug Ford that he didn’t think the province should run the ad campaign that’s being blamed for ending trade talks with the U.S.
When asked on Saturday what Ford’s response to that was, Carney said, “Well, you saw what came of it.”
The prime minister also confirmed he did apologize to U.S. President Donald Trump because Trump was “offended” by the ad.
“I’m the one who is responsible, in my role as prime minister, for the relationship with the president of the U.S., and the federal government is responsible for the foreign relationship with the U.S. government,” Carney said at a press conference as he wrapped a nine-day trip to Asia.
The apology happened at a dinner on Wednesday hosted by the South Korean president at the start of the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation forum in Gyeongju.
Trump cut off trade talks late last week, citing his frustration over the anti-tariff TV ad campaign the Ontario government was running in American markets.
The spot featured a 1987 radio address of the late U.S. president Ronald Reagan railing against tariffs.
Trump at first appeared unbothered by it, telling reporters on Oct. 21 that “if I was Canada I’d take that same ad also.”
He changed his tune a few days later, posting about Canada’s “egregious behaviour” on social media and declaring an end to trade talks.
Trump claims the ad was “false” and that Reagan loved tariffs. Multiple analyses of the advertisement have said it accurately reflected Reagan’s criticism of tariffs.
The president has also threatened to add another 10 per cent tariff on Canadian goods, although he has provided no details about what that means or when it could come into effect.
On Friday, he told reporters on Air Force One that he has a very good relationship with Carney.
“I like (Carney) a lot, but you know, what they did was wrong,” Trump said.
Carney characterized last week’s events as “noise,” saying that despite everything that has happened, Canada still has the best trade deal with the U.S. of any country. The vast majority of Canada-U.S. trade is exempted from tariffs because it falls under the Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement on trade.
“We can spend our time watching Truth Social, worrying about the reactions (to) individual things. We are staying calm,” Carney said.
Trade talks have not resumed, though the Canadian government has said it is ready to pick back up where it left off.
“We’ll wait until they’re ready,” Carney said.
Specific sectors like steel, aluminum, autos and lumber are subject to additional tariffs — and that is what the Canadian side had been working to negotiate before the ad campaign began.
Ford has been unapologetic about the ads and has said they were a success, given how widely they were viewed.
— With files from Kelly Geraldine Malone in Washington and Kyle Duggan in Ottawa