Peter Navarro told Canadian lobbyists to leave the US. What did his warning mean?

Peter Navarro, President Donald Trump’s senior counselor for trade and manufacturing, told Canadian lobbyists to leave the United States at a Washington economic event on September 29. His remarks linked the countries’ trade dispute to November’s US elections, with a warning aimed specifically at Maine and Michigan.

“Please, if you're on K Street, get the hell out of our country,” Navarro said, according to POLITICO. He then warned of consequences if Canadians interfered in the elections. The reporting establishes a conditional threat: it does not establish that interference occurred or identify a formal order expelling lobbyists.

Why Navarro targeted Canadian lobbyists

Navarro’s stated objection was to Canada’s use of Washington lobbying. At the Tuesday morning event, hosted by a communications and policy firm, he addressed Canadians in the audience and invoked K Street, the Washington shorthand for the lobbying industry.

“You've lobbied this country and you've been successful in the past and you think you can keep doing that,” he said, according to POLITICO’s report. He followed with: “Memo to Canada: You cannot do that.”

Why Maine and Michigan were named

Both states have competitive Senate and governor contests, according to POLITICO. The Senate races could help determine which party controls the chamber in 2027. Le Journal de Montréal identifies November 3 as the date of this year’s midterm elections.

The states also have direct economic stakes in the dispute. Michigan’s automotive industry is closely integrated with Canada. In Maine, forestry supply chains cross the border between harvesting and processing, making trade restrictions relevant to businesses on both sides.

Canada’s retaliation against Trump’s August tariff increase took effect on September 8. POLITICO reports that it disproportionately affected goods from Michigan, Maine and other states with competitive elections. Canadian Industry Minister Mélanie Joly had described the targeted duties as a “wise and strategic” way to exert political pressure.

“We think it's the right thing to do right now,” Joly said about those earlier measures. Her comments concerned the tariff strategy, rather than a response to Navarro’s September 29 speech. Neither that strategy nor the election context establishes that Canada changed voters’ choices.

In Maine, Republican Senator Susan Collins faces Democrat Troy Jackson, a former state senator. POLITICO reports that Collins has criticized the Canada tariffs and sought relief for particular products. In Michigan, Republican Senate nominee Mike Rogers has backed Trump’s negotiating approach, while a business advocacy group has opposed the tariffs.

The trade restrictions behind the exchange

Navarro spoke on the day import bans affecting approximately $1 billion in Canadian exports took effect, according to POLITICO. That figure describes the exports affected by the restrictions. It is not an estimate of economic losses caused by his speech.

The exchange followed the breakdown of trade talks in August and double-digit tariff increases by both governments. Canadian lobbying and political pressure also predated this confrontation: Ontario Premier Doug Ford ran US television advertisements criticizing Trump’s tariffs during the 2025 World Series, using Ronald Reagan’s words about their economic harm.

How Canadian officials and Ron Wyden responded

Prime Minister Mark Carney laughed when asked about Navarro’s warning at a Vancouver press conference and said he had “no response,” according to a CTV report excerpt reproduced by Political Press. That reaction is reported through the excerpt, rather than a full account of the exchange.

Separately, Canada-US Trade Minister Dominic LeBlanc rejected apologizing, Global News reported. He said bilateral contacts continued, but detailed negotiations had stopped.

Democratic Senator Ron Wyden, the Senate Finance Committee’s ranking member, criticized Navarro in an interview with POLITICO at the Capitol. He described the remarks as part of a “pattern of insults without facts.” That was Wyden’s assessment of the warning.

What Navarro’s warning does—and does not—establish

The accounts leave important limits unresolved. Neither POLITICO nor Le Journal de Montréal identifies a signed expulsion directive, an enforcement mechanism or evidence proving Canadian election interference. Le Journal’s account does not specify what additional punishment Navarro intended.

POLITICO reports that Navarro declined to answer its question after the event, leaving his warning without a subsequent clarification in that account. The September 29 reports also provide no timetable for renewed detailed trade negotiations or a comprehensive update on implementation of his threat.