Trump Action Archive

Supporting reports

• President imposes tariffs on 60 economies for forced labor import enforcement failures — The President issued a memorandum directing the U.S. Trade Representative to impose tariffs under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 on goods from 60 economies found to have failed to impose or effectively enforce prohibitions on forced-labor imports. Tariff rates range from 10 percent to 12.5 percent ad valorem, with product-specific exemptions and tariff-rate quotas for certain textile and apparel goods. The action follows investigations initiated March 12, 2026, and determinations made June 2, 2026, that the practices of each economy are unreasonable and burden U.S. commerce.
• Trump issued presidential memorandum imposing tariffs on 60 economies for forced labor enforcement failures — President Trump issued a presidential memorandum directing the U.S. Trade Representative to impose tariffs ranging from 10 to 12.5 percent ad valorem on goods from 60 economies, including major trading partners (Canada, Mexico, European Union, Japan, China, India), based on determinations that these economies fail to impose or effectively enforce prohibitions on forced-labor-produced imports. The memorandum follows a March 2026 section 301 investigation and June 2026 determinations of actionable practices. Tariffs include exemptions for specified products and tariff-rate quotas for certain textile and apparel goods from Bangladesh, Cambodia, Indonesia, and Malaysia, to be established by September 1, 2026.
• Trump imposes new tariffs on 80+ countries citing forced labor — At 12:01 a.m. on July 24, Trump imposed tariffs ranging from 10% to 12.5% on goods from more than 80 countries representing 99.4% of U.S. trade, claiming the countries produce goods using forced labor. The action invokes a different legal authority than the "Liberation Day" tariffs struck down by the Supreme Court in February 2026 and differs from tariffs imposed after that ruling. The time limit for imposing tariffs under the law used for the post-Supreme Court decision tariffs expired on July 24. Within hours, two small businesses sued in the U.S. Court of International Trade, alleging the new tariffs were designed to reinstate the unconstitutional tariff system.
• Trump imposes new tariffs on 60 countries — Trump imposed new tariffs of 10 to 12.5 percent on 60 countries, citing forced labor as the pretext. The bulletin does not specify which countries were targeted, the effective date of the tariffs, or the administration's justification for the specific rates.

Supporting reports

• US House passes war powers resolution directing Trump to end Iran conflict — The US House of Representatives passed a war powers resolution (214-208 vote) directing President Trump to withdraw military forces from the conflict with Iran. The resolution, proposed by Democrat Pramila Jayapal, passed with support from all Democrats and four Republicans (Tom Barrett, Warren Davidson, Thomas Massie, Brian Fitzpatrick). This follows an identical resolution passed in June that was also approved by the Senate. The Trump administration has argued war powers resolutions are unconstitutional and has not complied with the prior Senate-approved resolution.
• House passes concurrent resolution to end Iran War — The House of Representatives passed a concurrent resolution to end the war in Iran by a vote of 214 to 208. Four Republicans—Thomas Massie of Kentucky, Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania, Warren Davidson of Ohio, and Tom Barrett of Michigan—joined Democrats in support. A concurrent resolution expresses the sentiments of Congress but is not a law and does not require presidential signature. House members used the concurrent resolution mechanism because such resolutions are "privileged" and can bypass standard scheduling requirements.

Supporting reports

• Secretary Hegseth provides inconsistent testimony on Iran war objectives — During Senate Appropriations Committee testimony, Senator Jon Ossoff (D-GA) questioned Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth about statements made early in the Iran conflict claiming core objectives were to "destroy the missile threat" and "obliterate Iran's missiles and drones." Hegseth had declared four months earlier that all objectives had been achieved. When pressed, Hegseth declined to confirm whether the missile threat had been defeated, instead redefining "combat ineffective" to mean Iran could not deploy missiles at scale against the United States. Ossoff noted that Hegseth had assured the American people of Iranian surrender on day nine of the war and asked whether his statement that Iran's military had been "destroyed and made combat ineffective" was truthful.
• Senator Murray challenged Hegseth's claim that Iran's missile program is "functionally destroyed." — Senator Patty Murray cited Hegseth's April 8 statement that Iran's missile program was "functionally destroyed" with "launchers, production facilities and existing stockpiles depleted and decimated." She noted that Iran has been firing missiles at U.S. military bases and ships for the past week, contradicting Hegseth's assessment. Hegseth responded only that "Iran is at the weakest point militarily it has ever been in in the past decade."
• Hegseth and Joint Chiefs Chair Caine testified on $1.5 trillion DOD budget request. — Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and Joint Chiefs Chair Dan Caine testified before the Senate to defend a $1.5 trillion DOD budget request—nearly double the 2024 budget of $841 billion. Hegseth stated "not funding this department at $1.5 trillion is the greatest threat our nation faces," while Caine acknowledged air power has limits in achieving military objectives.
• Senator Durbin questioned unobligated DOD funding and "woke priorities" pivot. — Senator Dick Durbin asked Hegseth about $75 billion in unobligated DOD funding from the prior year's reconciliation package. Hegseth acknowledged the figure and stated "There's plans and designs on that - move away from all the woke priorities of what the Biden admin was pursuing," indicating funds would be redirected away from diversity and inclusion initiatives.
• Senator Merkley pressed Caine on civilian infrastructure targeting in retaliation. — Senator Jeff Merkley questioned Joint Chiefs Chair Dan Caine on whether the U.S. would target civilian infrastructure in retaliatory strikes, noting that international law prohibits such targeting. Caine responded only that "we have a robust process," declining to provide explicit assurance that civilian infrastructure would be protected.
• Senator Murray questioned necessity of National Guard funding and Caribbean strikes for Iran war. — Senator Patty Murray asked Hegseth why "billions of dollars more for the National Guard and this administration's illegal strikes in the Caribbean" are urgently needed for the Iran war. Hegseth responded by blaming "gross negligence and neglect of the Biden admin" without addressing the substance of her question about the connection between Caribbean operations and Iran conflict.
• Senator Reed challenged Hegseth on war authorization and Strait of Hormuz contingencies. — Senator Jack Reed accused Hegseth of "gross negligence" for failing to fully inform Trump that the Strait of Hormuz could be effectively closed by Iranian action. Reed questioned whether Trump should be "praised for starting war without authority" and creating conditions where "the world economy is suffering tremendously," challenging the administration's failure to obtain congressional authorization.
• Senator Reed questioned whether airstrikes alone will defeat Iran; Caine declined to address ground troop escalation. — Senator Jack Reed asked Joint Chiefs Chair Dan Caine whether airstrikes alone would defeat Iran. Caine acknowledged that "air power has got limits" but declined to address whether ground combat escalation would follow, stating "I think it'd be unhelpful for me to opine on hypotheticals."

Supporting reports

• DOJ Submits First-Ever Application to 'Zombie' Alien Terrorist Removal Court — Trump's Justice Department filed an application to the Alien Terrorist Removal Court, a decades-old tribunal established in 1996 but never previously used, seeking to expedite deportations of noncitizens deemed "alien terrorists." The court's procedures permit use of secret evidence that targets never see, raising constitutional concerns among legal scholars. The Secretary of State can unilaterally label someone an "alien terrorist" based on intent to engage in activities that "could endanger" U.S. welfare or security.