Democrats are furious after the House of Representatives approved the Lindsey O. Graham Sanctioning Russia and Iran Act of 2026, a measure that grants President Donald Trump fresh tariff authority that the left has long denounced. Several members of their own party joined Republicans in supporting the legislation.
A deal that needed revisions to gain White House backing preceded the vote. The measure was championed in the House by Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Texas, who has long backed Ukraine. Among its main provisions are tariffs reaching up to 500% on goods from Russia and duties of up to 100% on the top five nations purchasing Russian energy.
Tariff Authority at Issue
During debate, Rep. Richard Neal, D-Mass., argued against giving Trump the power to raise tariffs on imports. He pointed out that the bill does nothing to stop Trump from using those tariffs against Ukraine. He also warned that there is no assurance Trump would not apply them against Russia with the same strength his allies promise.
“There is no guarantee in this legislation that the president could not use these tariffs against Ukraine if he decided to do so.”
The Loophole Warning
D-N.Y.’s House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., made his position clear on the bill’s shortcomings. He argued that the president is not required to put sanctions on Russia according to how the law reads now.
“The manner in which this bill has been written doesn’t require the president of the United States to impose sanctions on Russia,” Jeffries said. “In fact, there are so many loopholes written into the bill, I believe that it’s very unlikely that the sanctions relief contemplated in the legislation will ever see the light of day.”
Two Democrats Cross Party Lines
On Tuesday, two Democrats sided with Republicans to save the bill. Reps. Jared Golden, D-Maine, and Marie Gluesenkamp Perez, D-Wash., defied their party leaders to move the legislation ahead. Their votes kept the sanctions package from expiring on the House floor during a fight over an issue that had nothing to do with it.
This month, when the two acted together, they drew a public warning from Jeffries, who labeled it a “breach of trust.”
The Courts as Safeguard
Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., was chiefly responsible for building the bill and pushing Democratic backing in the Senate. He also made a case about why Trump might not misuse the authorities he holds.
“If Donald Trump wants to break this law, he will be restrained by the courts, just as when he broke the law on tariffs previously,” Blumenthal told Fox News Digital.
What the Bill Does
The bill targets Russian money, according to McCaul, who said it sanctions Russian officials and oligarchs, banks and financial institutions, and the shadow fleet that moves cheap Russian energy.
“It also punishes countries providing financial support for the deadliest war in Europe since World War II,” McCaul said. “Because, as we’ve heard from President Zelensky’s team, you can evade sanctions, which the Russians have done for years. But you cannot evade tariffs.”
The bill now heads to Trump’s desk for his signature.
Democrats Weigh Two Paths
At least two Democrats sided with Republicans, defying party leaders. The division shows the strain between those seeking to halt the bill and those working to sustain its life.
The bill protects Ukraine’s interests against Russia while granting Trump tools to act on them. The outcome depends on whether the bill’s safeguards hold.
| Step | Action |
|---|---|
| Debate | Rep. Richard Neal warns against Trump’s tariff authority |
| Vote | House passes the bill |
| Reprimand | Jeffries calls Golden and Gluesenkamp Perez’s earlier move a “breach of trust” |
| Next | Bill heads to Trump’s desk for signature |
Approval from the White House demanded alterations before the vote could proceed, so the result now rests on whether the bill’s protections prove sufficient.
Where the paper stands
The paper backs neither side on the Graham Act itself but supports keeping the channels open for trade and diplomacy with Russia and Iran, and it is against concentrations of tariff authority in any single president’s hands. The vote shows Democrats divided, some crossing party lines to keep the bill alive, others warning of its risks.
Neal’s warning that the bill gives Trump tariff power without binding him to use it against Russia is the kind of concern the paper raises about concentrated executive authority. Jeffries’s point that the bill contains loopholes that make sanctions relief unlikely to happen is another such concern. Both speak to the paper’s skepticism of foreign entanglements and its preference for deals over standoffs.
Readers should watch whether the bill’s safeguards actually restrain Trump, as Blumenthal argues they will. They should also note the irony that Democrats who voted against the bill’s passage now face a president with expanded tariff powers — a concentration of authority the paper has long warned against. The coming months will show whether the courts, as Blumenthal says, can restrain a president who breaks the law.
Get the Notebook.
The day's best stories and every fresh verdict, in plain English, in your inbox by seven. One email a day, no more.