Trump Threatens to Delay Gordie Howe Bridge Opening: Unpacking the US-Canada Trade and Infrastructure Dispute

The proposed Gordie Howe International Bridge, a major infrastructure project decades in the making, has become the center of a new political controversy. Former President Donald Trump has threatened to block its opening, citing unresolved financial and trade grievances with Canada. This article provides a comprehensive, fact-based examination of the situation, separating political rhetoric from the project’s legal and logistical realities. We explore the bridge’s background, the validity of the threats, the history of US-Canada trade tensions, and what this means for cross-border commerce and relations.

Introduction: A Bridge at the Center of a Diplomatic Storm

The Gordie Howe International Bridge is more than just a structure; it is a symbol of binational cooperation and a critical economic artery. Spanning the Detroit River, it is designed to connect Windsor, Ontario, and Detroit, Michigan, alleviating congestion on the aging Ambassador Bridge. However, in a statement on his Truth Social platform, former President Trump declared the bridge should not open until the United States is “fully compensated for everything we have given them.” This threat has injected significant uncertainty into a project scheduled to open in 2026, raising questions about executive authority, international agreements, and the future of North American trade infrastructure.

Key Points: Understanding the Core of the Dispute

• The Threat: Former President Trump stated he would not “permit” the bridge to open, demanding “fairness and respect” and full compensation from Canada.
• The Project: The $6.4 billion CAD Gordie Howe Bridge is funded and owned by Canada (via the Windsor-Detroit Bridge Authority) but is a binational project requiring U.S. approvals for final opening.
• Trump’s Rationale: He cites long-standing dairy tariffs imposed by Canada and a recent Canada-China trade deal as justification, making claims about Chinese control over Canadian hockey that are factually incorrect.
• Legal & Practical Hurdles: It is legally and practically unclear how a former president could unilaterally block a project approved by the current U.S. administration, governed by a binational treaty, and nearing completion.
• Historical Context: The project faced previous opposition from the Moroun family, owners of the competing Ambassador Bridge, who lobbied the first Trump administration to halt it.

Background: The Decade-Long Journey of the Gordie Howe International Bridge

Project Origins and Binational Governance

The need for a new crossing was identified in the 1990s due to severe traffic congestion and security concerns at the Ambassador Bridge, which handles nearly 30% of all U.S.-Canada trade by value. After years of complex negotiations, the Windsor-Detroit Bridge Authority (WDBA) was established in 2012 as a Canadian Crown corporation to oversee the project. The 2012 Agreement on the Construction and Operation of the Gordie Howe International Bridge is a binding treaty between Canada and the United States.

Under this framework, Canada agreed to finance, design, build, and operate the bridge, including the U.S. plaza and approaches. In return, the U.S. federal government, through agencies like U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), is responsible for providing necessary land, permits, and staffing for the American port of entry. The bridge is a publicly-owned asset: the Canadian side is owned by the WDBA, and the U.S. side will be owned by the state of Michigan, as stipulated in the agreement. Construction began in 2018.

The Competing Ambassador Bridge and Past Opposition

The project has always had a powerful private-sector opponent: the Moroun family, which owns the existing Ambassador Bridge. During the first Trump administration, the Morouns lobbied heavily, arguing the publicly-funded new bridge would infringe on their private toll revenue and constitute unfair government competition. This led to a 2017 review by the U.S. Department of Transportation, which ultimately found no legal basis to stop the project. A joint statement from then-President Trump and Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau later that year affirmed the new bridge as a “vital economic link,” seemingly ending that phase of opposition.

Analysis: Deconstructing the Threats and Legal Realities

The Authority of a Former President

The most immediate question is procedural: What legal authority does a former president have to “permit” or block an international bridge? The answer is effectively none. The project operates under the authority of the current U.S. President, Joe Biden, and the relevant federal agencies (Federal Highway Administration, CBP, Coast Guard). Final approvals for opening are contingent on completing environmental reviews, safety certifications, and operational plans—processes handled by career officials and the Biden administration. A public statement from a former president carries political weight but no direct legal power to halt a binational treaty project.

Understanding the “Compensation” Demand

Trump’s demand for “full compensation” is vague and not anchored in the binding 2012 agreement. Canada’s financial commitment is clear: it is paying the entire $6.4 billion CAD construction cost. The treaty does not include provisions for the U.S. to receive direct financial payments from Canada for the bridge. The rhetoric appears to conflate the bridge project with broader, unrelated trade disputes. The reference to Canada “profiting from America” misunderstands the asset’s ownership structure—the U.S. side will be owned by Michigan, not the federal government.

Fact-Checking the Rationale: Dairy Tariffs and the “China Deal”

• Dairy Tariffs: Trump correctly notes that Canada imposes high tariffs on imported dairy products (often over 200%) to protect its supply-managed system. This is a legitimate, long-standing trade irritant for the U.S., but it is unrelated to the bridge treaty, which was signed under the Obama administration and affirmed under Trump’s first term.
• Canada-China Trade Deal: Trump references a “trade deal signed between Canada and China last month.” This appears to be a misunderstanding or mischaracterization. Canada and China do not have a modern free trade agreement. There may be references to ongoing sectoral discussions or World Trade Organization matters, but no comprehensive new deal was signed. His subsequent claim that China will “terminate ALL Ice Hockey” and “completely eliminate The Stanley Cup” is factually false. The Stanley Cup is owned and controlled by the National Hockey League (NHL), a private North American league. No foreign government can terminate it.

The Real Leverage Points and Potential Delays

While a former president cannot directly block the bridge, the political pressure could influence the current administration. Potential, though unlikely, delays could stem from:

• Withholding Federal Permits: The U.S. federal government still holds keys to final operational permits, especially for the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) plaza. A directive from the White House to slow-walk approvals could cause delays.
• Funding for U.S. Approaches: While Canada funds the main bridge, the U.S. is responsible for connecting highway infrastructure on its side. Disputes over federal funding for these approach roads could create bottlenecks.
• Political Posturing: The threat may be primarily tactical, aimed at rallying political support by framing a complex binational project as a simple case of Canada “taking advantage” of the U.S., fitting into a broader narrative of trade renegotiation.

However, the project has strong support in Michigan, a state critical to U.S. electoral politics. Governor Gretchen Whitmer and Detroit’s leadership are staunch proponents, viewing the bridge as an economic necessity.

Practical Advice: For Businesses, Travelers, and Stakeholders

For Commercial Trucking and Logistics Companies

Do not alter long-term planning based on a single political statement. The bridge remains on track for a 2026 opening. However, companies should:

• Monitor Official Channels: Follow updates from the Windsor-Detroit Bridge Authority and U.S. Federal Highway Administration for concrete progress, not political rhetoric.
• Diversify Routing: Continue using the Ambassador Bridge and other crossings (like the Blue Water Bridge) in planning. The new bridge will add capacity but is not yet a sole point of failure.
• Review Contractual Force Majeure Clauses: Long-term supply chain contracts may need to account for potential, albeit remote, infrastructure delays.

For Municipal and Provincial Governments

Entities in Ontario and Michigan should:

• Reaffirm Binational Commitments: Publicly reiterate support for the 2012 treaty and the economic benefits of the project to counter political narratives.
• Engage Federal Partners: Ensure the U.S. Department of State and Transportation are fully engaged in defending the project’s legal and operational framework.
• Prepare for Public Communication: Develop clear messaging about the bridge’s ownership, funding, and benefits to address misinformation.

For General Public and Commuters

The bridge’s opening is still years away. Current cross-border travel and commuting patterns will remain unchanged until at least 2026. The project’s long-term benefit will be reduced travel times and less congestion at the Ambassador Bridge.

FAQ: Frequently Asked Questions About the Bridge Dispute

Can Donald Trump Actually Stop the Gordie Howe Bridge from Opening?

No, not directly. As a former president, he holds no executive authority. The project is governed by a binational treaty and requires approvals from the current Biden administration. His threat is a political statement, not a legal or administrative action.

Who Owns and Pays for the Gordie Howe Bridge?

The bridge is financed, built, and will be operated by Canada through the Windsor-Detroit Bridge Authority (a Canadian Crown corporation). The U.S. side of the border crossing (the port of entry) will be owned by the state of Michigan. The entire project cost is approximately $6.4 billion CAD, borne by Canada.

What is the Legal Basis for the Project?

The project is built on the 2012 Agreement on the Construction and Operation of the Gordie Howe International Bridge, a treaty between the Governments of Canada and the United States. It was ratified by both countries and is supported by implementing legislation in both nations.

How Does This Relate to US-Canada Dairy Tariffs?

It doesn’t. The dairy tariff issue is a separate, long-standing trade dispute under the USMCA (United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement). The bridge treaty is a standalone infrastructure agreement. Linking the two is a political tactic, not a legal or contractual connection.

What Happens if There Are Delays?

Significant delays would likely lead to cost overruns primarily borne by Canada. The greater impact would be prolonged congestion and economic inefficiency at the Ambassador Bridge, hurting trade-dependent industries in Michigan and Ontario.

Conclusion: Symbolism vs. Substance in Cross-Border Relations

The threat by former President Trump to block the Gordie Howe International Bridge is a potent piece of political symbolism, framing a complex binational achievement as a case of national victimhood. However, when examined against the treaty governing it, the project’s ownership structure, and the separation of powers, the threat lacks a clear mechanism for execution. The bridge is a testament to decades of cooperative infrastructure planning between the world’s largest trading partners. While broader trade disputes like dairy tariffs are legitimate negotiation points, leveraging a nearly complete, treaty-bound public works project as collateral is unprecedented and legally tenuous. The ultimate test will be whether the current U.S. administration allows bureaucratic processes to continue apace, upholding a agreement that serves the mutual economic interests of Michigan and Ontario, and by extension, the United States and Canada. The bridge, once completed, will stand not as a monument to dispute, but as a permanent fixture of connectivity, regardless of the political storms that may swirl around it.

Sources and Further Reading

• Windsor-Detroit Bridge Authority (WDBA). (n.d.). Project Overview & Agreement. www.gordiehowebridge.com
• Government of Canada. (2012). Agreement on the Construction and Operation of the Gordie Howe International Bridge. https://www.canada.ca
• U.S. Department of State. (2012). U.S.-Canada Agreement on the Gordie Howe International Bridge. https://www.state.gov
• Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC). (2023, October). Gordie Howe International Bridge: What to know about the $6.4B project. https://www.cbc.ca
• Government of Michigan. (n.d.). Gordie Howe International Bridge. https://www.michigan.gov
• Congressional Research Service. (2023). U.S.-Canada Trade and Economic Relations. (For context on dairy tariffs and USMCA).
• Text of the 2012 Binational Agreement on the Gordie Howe International Bridge.