QUESTION PERIOD — Ministry of Internal Trade
Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement
February 24, 2026
Welcome back, Minister LeBlanc. Since the U.S. Supreme Court ruling, President Trump has pivoted to a new tariff authority, imposing a 10% to 15% global levy.
Minister, how does the Supreme Court’s invalidation of the tariffs based on the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA, and the president’s immediate imposition of new levies under a separate legal authority change Canada’s practical exposure under the Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement, or CUSMA? And what is the government’s legal assessment of whether these replacement tariffs are themselves CUSMA-compliant?
Senator, thank you for the question. The final legal advice and analysis are being prepared or are being put together. Obviously, over the weekend, we had some preliminary advice, both from our embassy in Washington and from the government’s legal advisers, both in Canada and in the United States.
The interesting thing — you’re right — is that, since the president’s authority under the IEEPA legislation was evacuated, he’s using a different piece of American legislation. He has announced 10% and then 15% across-the-board tariffs. Under American law, they can’t be in place for more than 150 days without congressional authority.
I spoke earlier this week with the U.S. Trade Representative, Ambassador Greer. The Americans immediately indicated there would be a CUSMA exemption from this new tariff that the President was proposing, similar to what had been in existence under the IEEPA tariffs. That is an important recognition of the value of the trilateral agreement.
There is no doubt the President has always said that he will continue to look at American law to implement his tariff agenda. The fact that the American government recognized the CUSMA exemption again tells me that they see value in the agreement.
Also, the Supreme Court’s ruling has shifted the tariff debate to Capitol Hill. Partisan legislation aimed at reasserting Congressional authority over trade has gained new momentum.
How is Canada engaging directly with the Congressional counterparts — the Senate Finance Committee, for example, and the House Ways and Means Committee in particular — to help shape any forthcoming U.S. trade legislation in a manner consistent with CUSMA’s obligations and Canada’s market access interest?
Senator, you have, I think, properly identified the very considerable value that we as a government place on parliamentary diplomacy. There are members of this chamber who have relationships with U.S. legislators. There are interparliamentary associations. Many members, I’m sure, who do very good work are in this chamber.
I know our ambassador — the previous ambassador, who I understand was in your gallery earlier today, Ambassador Hillman — had been extraordinarily engaged for many years with legislators in both houses in the United States.
I was with the Prime Minister when he spoke with the new ambassador, Mark Wiseman. It’s very much a part of his priority work as well. I, myself, when I’m in the United States, talk to senior Republican leaders.
Thank you, minister.
