Rubbish Check
ABC News Business · 29 August 2026
source“Untested in court, Trump’s new tariffs on Canada raise legal questions”
R2/ 10
Lightly altered
Rubbish Rating — 1 = base fact, 10 = pure rubbish
12345678910
In short
Rubbish Talk rates ABC News' headline that Trump's Section 338 tariffs on Canada "raise legal questions" a 2/10 because the law genuinely has never been litigated and no lawsuit has even been filed, a fact the headline states plainly rather than spins.
The Verdict
Base fact, close to clean. The headline claims the tariffs are legally untested and raise questions, and that is exactly what the reporting shows: a 96-year-old statute never before invoked, no court case yet filed, and named legal experts on both sides genuinely split on whether it survives a challenge. This is a rare case of a headline undersells the drama rather than inflating it.
What actually happened
Trump invoked Section 338 of the 1930 Tariff Act, never used by any president before, to impose 50% tariffs on roughly $20 billion of Canadian goods over alleged discrimination against U.S. dairy, auto and alcohol exporters. On July 20, 2026, President Trump issued three proclamations imposing 50% tariffs on certain imports from Canada under Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930, marking the first time any US president has invoked this authority. Canada retaliated with matching tariffs, and no lawsuit has yet been filed against the U.S. measure.
Key facts
- The three proclamations cover approximately US$20 billion worth of US imports from Canada in both 2024 and 2025, or approximately 5% of the value of all goods imported from Canada.
- Covered goods range far beyond the cited grievances: Each Section 338 proclamation imposes a 50% tariff on a different set of Canadian imports, covering products ranging from wine to hockey sticks to cement.
- The statute's history: Tariff Commission records document investigations, administrative consideration, and diplomatic use of the possibility of retaliatory duties. What appears absent from the historical record is an actual imposition of penalty tariffs.
- This follows an earlier legal defeat: a U.S. court had already struck down President Trump's "Liberation Day" tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), calling them unconstitutional and stopping 10% global tariffs and higher levies on China, Canada, and Mexico.
- As of publication, no plaintiff has sued: the Liberty Justice Center's CEO told ABC she hadn't had a strong response from businesses willing to challenge the levies.
What to watch for
Watch for whether a business with standing actually files suit, given the smaller 5% import share makes it harder to find an injured plaintiff than with the sweeping IEEPA tariffs. Also watch whether Canada and the U.S. resume the trade talks that broke off August 21, which could moot the legal question entirely before any court rules.
About this scoreThe R-Score is Rubbish Talk's editorial opinion on how far a headline's framing sits from what the underlying facts support. It is a judgement about presentation and emphasis, not an allegation that any outlet has acted dishonestly. Every figure we rely on is linked under Receipts so you can check it yourself.
