U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) speaks with reporters as the House votes to end the partial government shutdown on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., U.S., Feb. 3, 2026.
Kylie Cooper | Reuters
House Republican leaders suffered a loss on a procedural vote Tuesday as fellow GOP lawmakers balked at voting to block challenges to President Donald Trump’s tariffs through the summer.
The GOP rebellion on the vote, which failed 214-217, highlights divisions among House Republicans, a dynamic that could make it even harder for Speaker Mike Johnson,, R-La., to advance his and Trump’s agenda through a narrowly divided Congress. Dissatisfied factions within the House GOP have revolted several times this Congress, forcing the release of files related to sex offender Jeffrey Epstein and supporting a failed Democratic effort to extend Obamacare subsidies.
Johnson could only afford to lose one Republican on the measure, which would also have set the rules for debate on a bill to boost domestic production of critical minerals. Three Republicans joined every Democrat to defeat the rule.
If they choose to continue pursuing the tariff language, GOP leaders will now need to go back to the House Rules Committee and attach it to a new rule.
Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., a perennial thorn in the side of GOP leadership, was one of the Republicans to oppose the rule, along with Reps. Kevin Kiley of California and Don Bacon of Nebraska, as frustration over Trump’s tariffs and leadership’s maneuvering percolates within the Republican ranks.
Kiley told CNBC earlier on Tuesday that he objects to “this idea that everyone needs to stick together to bring a particular bill on the floor” because it makes the House “less of a democratic body.”
“Article I of the Constitution places authority over taxes and tariffs with Congress for a reason, but for too long, we have handed that authority to the executive branch. It’s time for Congress to reclaim that responsibility,” Bacon posted to X after the vote.
The vote was originally slated for early afternoon, but House Republicans rescheduled it for Tuesday night.
Johnson earlier on Tuesday said he expected the measure to pass and that the rationale for the vote this week was “to allow the Supreme Court to rule on the pending case.” The Supreme Court is considering a legal challenge to Trump’s tariffs with a ruling pending following oral arguments last November.
“That process has been playing out. I think it’s logical to allow that to continue. The president’s trade policies have been a great benefit to the country,” Johnson said at a news conference Tuesday morning.
The House Rules Committee on Monday approved language that would block any House votes disapproving of Trump’s tariffs through July 31. House Democrats had already planned to force a vote disapproving of Trump’s tariffs this week.
“It is no secret that in private many Republican members of Congress have concerns with President Trump’s tariff policies. Now some are even voicing their concerns in public,” the House Rules Committee’s top Democrat, Rep. Jim McGovern, of Massachusetts, said at Monday’s hearing.
“They were just about to have the chance to vote this week to end them. So what’s this all about? The White House is scared. They know that the Republican House finally, after months of blocking itself from doing what the Senate has already done, is poised to vote to end these unpopular, unwise, downright dumb tariffs,” McGovern continued.
The Senate has on multiple occasions voted to strike down tariffs issued by Trump, while the House has blocked votes on tariff-related resolutions. The latest prohibition on tariff votes expired at the end of January.
For Tuesday’s vote, some other Republicans expressed their discomfort with tariffs, but ultimately voted in favor of the rule.
“The Supreme Court is going to be deciding this issue by June. So there is an argument to be made to maintain the status quo until then,” Rep. Tom McClintock, R-Calif., told CNBC on Tuesday.
“I believe in free trade. And tariffs are a big mistake. But given that the Supreme Court’s about to weigh in, maybe we ought to just keep our powder dry and see what they say,” said McClintock, who supported the rule.
— CNBC’s Karen Sloan contributed to this report.
Read the original article here