Imposing Duties to Address the Flow of Illicit Drugs Across Our Northern Border

February 1, 2025

Presidential Actions

View Original

Action Summary

Purpose: Declare a national emergency to counter the influx of illicit drugs, particularly opioids like fentanyl, across the United States’ northern border and address Canada’s inadequate enforcement and cooperation.
National Emergency Expansion: Extends the previously declared national emergency at the southern border to include the drug crisis and threats stemming from cross-border illicit activities with Canada.
Tariff Impositions:
- General Canadian Products: Imposes an additional 25% ad valorem duty on articles of Canadian origin entering the U.S. after February 4, 2025, with specific transit exemptions.
- Energy Products: Applies a 10% ad valorem duty on designated energy or energy resource products from Canada, subject to similar timing and certification requirements.
Enforcement and Compliance:
- Grants authority to the Secretary of Homeland Security to modify the Harmonized Tariff Schedule and enforce the duties.
- Mandates interagency consultation (including with the State, Treasury, Attorney General, and National Security advisors) to monitor progress and recommend further actions.
Conditional Measures: Tariffs may be removed if Canada takes adequate cooperative enforcement actions to mitigate the public health and security crisis.
Additional Authorities:
- Authorizes rulemaking and regulatory actions by relevant agencies under IEEPA and NEA.
- Requires regular reporting to Congress on the state of the national emergency and the implementation of this order.
General Provisions: Asserts that existing legal authorities remain unaffected and clarifies that the order does not confer enforceable rights to any party against the U.S. government.

Risks & Considerations

The imposition of tariffs on Canadian products could lead to increased costs for goods and services, potentially affecting Vanderbilt University’s procurement processes and budget allocations.
There is a risk of retaliatory measures from Canada, which could impact research collaborations, student exchanges, and partnerships with Canadian institutions.
The focus on border security and drug trafficking may lead to stricter regulations and oversight, potentially affecting international students and faculty from Canada, as well as cross-border research activities.
Vanderbilt University may need to consider the implications of these policies on its healthcare programs, particularly in relation to public health and drug policy research.

Impacted Programs

Vanderbilt’s Procurement Office may need to reassess supply chains and vendor relationships to mitigate the impact of increased tariffs on Canadian goods.
International Student and Scholar Services could face challenges in navigating new regulations affecting Canadian students and faculty, requiring additional resources and support.
The Vanderbilt Institute for Global Health might see increased demand for expertise in public health policy and international collaboration to address the opioid crisis.
Research collaborations with Canadian institutions may need to be reevaluated to ensure compliance with new trade and security policies.

Financial Impact

The additional tariffs could lead to increased operational costs for the university, necessitating budget adjustments and potential reallocation of resources.
Potential disruptions in research funding and partnerships with Canadian entities could impact grant opportunities and collaborative projects.
Changes in trade policies may affect the availability and cost of materials and equipment sourced from Canada, impacting research and academic programs.
Vanderbilt University may need to explore alternative funding sources and partnerships to offset potential financial impacts from these policy changes.

Relevance Score: 4 (The order presents a need for potential major changes or transformations of programs.)

Key Actions

Vanderbilt’s Office of Federal Relations should monitor developments related to the imposition of tariffs on Canadian products, as these could impact research collaborations or partnerships with Canadian institutions. Understanding the implications of these tariffs will be crucial for maintaining and developing international partnerships.
The Vanderbilt University Medical Center should assess the potential impact of the public health crisis related to illicit drugs on its operations and community health initiatives. Engaging in research and public health strategies to address opioid addiction and related health issues could position the center as a leader in combating this crisis.
Vanderbilt’s Department of Political Science should consider conducting research on the geopolitical implications of the executive order, particularly in relation to U.S.-Canada relations and international trade policies. This research could provide valuable insights for policymakers and contribute to academic discourse on international relations.
The Peabody College of Education and Human Development could explore educational programs focused on the societal impacts of drug trafficking and public health crises. Developing curricula that address these issues can enhance the college’s role in preparing future leaders to tackle complex social challenges.

Opportunities

The executive order presents an opportunity for Vanderbilt’s Center for Addiction Research to expand its research on opioid addiction and treatment. By leveraging its expertise, the center can contribute to national efforts to address the opioid crisis and secure funding for innovative research projects.
Vanderbilt can capitalize on the increased focus on border security and public health by developing interdisciplinary programs that combine public policy, health sciences, and international relations. These programs can attract students interested in addressing global challenges and enhance Vanderbilt’s reputation as a leader in interdisciplinary education.
The emphasis on international cooperation to combat drug trafficking offers an opportunity for Vanderbilt’s Law School to engage in policy analysis and advocacy. By providing legal expertise and recommendations, the law school can influence policy decisions and contribute to the development of effective international legal frameworks.
By engaging with policymakers and the broader academic community, Vanderbilt can position itself as a thought leader in addressing the public health and security challenges posed by illicit drug trafficking. Hosting conferences, workshops, and public forums on these issues can further establish Vanderbilt as a hub for innovative research and policy development.

Relevance Score: 4 (The order presents the potential for major process changes required for Vanderbilt’s programs due to impacts on international partnerships and public health initiatives.)

Average Relevance Score: 4.2

Timeline for Implementation

February 4, 2025 at 12:01 a.m. Eastern Time: Tariffs on Canadian-sourced articles apply to all goods entered for consumption or withdrawn from a warehouse on or after this time.
February 1, 2025: The order is dated, and goods loaded onto a vessel or in transit before 12:01 a.m. Eastern Time on this date are exempt if the importer certifies as specified.

The shortest applicable deadline is February 4, 2025, which is less than 30 days from the order date.

Relevance Score: 5

Impacted Government Organizations

Department of Homeland Security (DHS): Charged with overall border security responsibilities, implementing modifications to the Harmonized Tariff Schedule, and coordinating interagency responses.
U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP): Tasked with certifying import entries and handling the revised governing rules for goods entering the United States under the new tariff structure.
Department of State: Consulted to address international diplomatic aspects and to engage in coordinated efforts with foreign counterparts regarding border issues.
Department of Justice (DOJ) – Attorney General: Responsible for legal oversight and enforcement actions concerning illicit trafficking and related criminal activities.
Department of the Treasury: Involved in financial oversight related to tariff imposition and ensuring compliance with trade regulations.
Department of Commerce: Engaged in advising on economic implications and regulatory measures arising from the new trade directives.
Office of Management and Budget (OMB): Mentioned in relation to budgetary, administrative, and legislative proposals that ensure proper funding and compliance with the order.
Executive Office of the President (including the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs and the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security): Responsible for strategic coordination and advising on national security and homeland issues related to the emergency.

Relevance Score: 3 (A moderate number of key Federal agencies are implicated by the directive, spanning across border security, legal, financial, and economic oversight.)

Responsible Officials

Secretary of Homeland Security – Charged with modifying the Harmonized Tariff Schedule, coordinating rulemaking and enforcement efforts, and effectively redelegating functions within the Department to implement these directives.
Secretary of State – Tasked with consulting on border conditions and coordinating with Homeland Security to assess Canada’s actions.
Attorney General – Responsible for coordinating with Homeland Security and other officials on enforcement and legal responses.
Secretary of the Treasury – Involved in coordinating tariff-related actions and reporting to Congress in conjunction with Homeland Security.
Secretary of Commerce – Engaged in the implementation and oversight of trade measures as part of the directive.
Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs – Supports coordination on national security aspects related to the crisis at the northern border.
Assistant to the President for Homeland Security – Works alongside the National Security Affairs official to ensure that domestic security measures are aligned with the President’s directives.

Relevance Score: 5 (Directly impacts White House and Cabinet-level officials, including multiple agency heads and senior advisors.)