Congress and the courts are again reshaping how far a president can go in using tariffs as a foreign-policy tool. This time, the focus is a Russia sanctions package that would give President Donald Trump new, explicit authority to impose steep import taxes on countries that keep buying Russian energy. The shift comes months after the Supreme Court ruled that Trump could not rely on a separate emergency-powers law for his earlier tariff program.
Senate advances Russia sanctions bill with new tariff authority
The U.S. Senate voted 86-11 on Friday, August 7, to pass the Lindsey O. Graham Sanctioning Russia Act of 2026, according to the Associated Press and Axios. The legislation targets Russian President Vladimir Putin, senior Kremlin officials and Russia’s energy sector, while also authorizing the president to impose tariffs of as much as 100% on the top five importers of Russian oil and natural gas. That would create a new trade tool aimed not only at Russia, but also at countries whose purchases help finance Moscow’s war in Ukraine.
The bill’s tariff section drew support from both Republicans and Democrats, but it also prompted visible concern on the Senate floor. The Associated Press reported that Sen. Raphael Warnock of Georgia said he received a written commitment from U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer that tariffs would be lifted when countries are no longer considered top buyers of Russian energy or facilitators of sanctions evasion. Even so, Warnock said lawmakers should not have to choose between checking Putin and limiting a president’s tariff reach.
Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky opposed the measure and said tariffs function as a tax on imported goods that would raise costs for American families, according to the AP. Efforts by Paul and Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon to strip the tariff authority from the legislation did not succeed. House action is expected when lawmakers return later in August, but the final timeline and any changes to the tariff language have not yet been confirmed publicly.
The bill is national in scope, but its effects would likely be felt through import prices, supply chains and diplomacy that reach into every U.S. state. The AP reported that the tariff authority would apply to the world’s top five purchasers of Russian oil or natural gas, a group that could include major U.S. trading partners such as China and India. Depending on how the authority is used, importers, manufacturers and retailers across the United States could face higher costs on affected goods.
What remains unresolved is exactly which countries would be designated under the bill at any given time and how that ranking would be measured. Commentary from Clark Packard and Scott Lincicome of the Cato Institute said the legislation does not clearly specify what data would determine the five largest buyers of Russian energy. Their analysis also said the bill leaves substantial discretion to the executive branch over tariff rates, exemptions and the duration of tariffs once imposed.
That uncertainty matters for U.S. businesses and consumers because the president could have room to set different tariff rates for different countries under the same law. Axios reported that the legislation would provide a more legally durable instrument than some of Trump’s earlier tariff actions, at least for this category of countries. The House has not yet released a final enacted version, and no federal agency has published a definitive list of countries that would immediately face the new tariffs if the bill becomes law.
The push for this legislation follows a major court defeat for Trump’s earlier tariff strategy. On February 20, 2026, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act did not authorize the president to impose the broad tariffs he had announced under that statute, according to the court’s opinion and Reuters coverage of the decision. That ruling blocked the legal foundation for Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariff program and forced the administration to look for other authorities.
Since then, Trump and his advisers have turned to other trade statutes, and critics have warned those moves could also face litigation. Axios and Cato both reported that the Russia sanctions bill would give the president a more explicit grant of tariff power from Congress, making challenges like the IEEPA case less direct. In that sense, the measure is both a sanctions bill and a response to the limits the Supreme Court placed on unilateral executive action earlier this year.
For U.S. residents, the immediate takeaway is that Congress is considering a law that could widen presidential tariff authority even after the courts narrowed it. If the House approves the bill and Trump signs it, the practical impact would depend on which countries are targeted, what tariff rates are chosen and whether waivers are granted in the national interest. As of August 10, the Senate has acted, the House has not yet taken its final vote, and the scope of implementation remains tied to decisions that would be made by the White House and U.S. trade officials.