Trump threatens Windsor–Detroit bridge opening

Speaking to supporters and later reinforcing the message through campaign aides, Trump argued that the bridge’s opening should be tied to what he described as unresolved trade imbalances and border enforcement concerns. He said the United States should not “hand over a strategic advantage” without securing concessions, suggesting federal approvals or operational permissions could be delayed. The remarks immediately drew responses from Canadian officials and industry groups who stressed that the project was the result of a bilateral agreement and years of joint planning.

The Gordie Howe International Bridge, a six-lane, cable-stayed span across the Detroit River, is intended to provide a direct motorway-to-motorway connection between Highway 401 in Ontario and Interstate 75 in Michigan. When operational, it is expected to handle a substantial share of cross-border freight traffic that currently funnels through the privately owned Ambassador Bridge, reducing bottlenecks and improving supply-chain resilience for manufacturers on both sides.

Canadian authorities have emphasised that construction is complete and that the bridge was built under a long-standing treaty framework, with Canada financing the project and recouping costs through toll revenues. The Windsor-Detroit Bridge Authority, the binational body overseeing delivery, has said preparations for operations and customs staffing are under way. While it acknowledged that final approvals involve agencies in both countries, it maintained that the process is largely procedural.

Trump’s intervention has sharpened political sensitivities around border infrastructure, particularly in Michigan, where automotive production depends on just-in-time deliveries of parts that often cross the border multiple times during assembly. Business groups warn that any delay could carry economic costs. The Detroit Regional Chamber has previously said the bridge would strengthen the region’s competitiveness by providing redundancy in case of closures or disruptions at existing crossings.

US federal law gives the executive branch influence over international bridges through permitting and coordination with customs and border agencies. Legal experts note, however, that blocking an opening outright could face challenges if it contradicts treaty obligations or established regulatory processes. Any attempt to halt operations would likely prompt court scrutiny and diplomatic engagement.

The comments also revive memories of earlier tensions during Trump’s first term, when trade disputes over tariffs and market access strained relations with close allies. Analysts say the bridge threat fits a familiar pattern of using infrastructure and logistics as bargaining chips, even when projects are designed to deliver mutual benefits. Supporters argue that such tactics force negotiations that protect domestic interests; critics counter that they undermine investor confidence and regional planning.

Canadian political leaders have responded cautiously. Federal ministers stressed the importance of keeping trade corridors open and predictable, pointing to the bridge’s role in supporting jobs and economic activity across the Great Lakes region. Ontario officials echoed those concerns, highlighting the province’s reliance on exports to the United States and the need for stable cross-border links.

On the US side, reaction has been mixed. Some lawmakers aligned with Trump praised the hard-line stance, saying infrastructure leverage should be used to address border security and trade fairness. Others, including representatives from Michigan, urged restraint, warning that uncertainty could hurt local businesses and workers more than it pressures Ottawa.

The Ambassador Bridge’s private ownership adds another layer of complexity. Its operators have long opposed the new crossing, arguing it is unnecessary and financially risky. While the Gordie Howe Bridge was conceived to ensure public control and long-term capacity, critics of Trump’s remarks suggest the threat could be seen as favouring existing interests over broader economic planning.

Customs agencies in both countries continue to prepare for the transition, including staffing and systems testing. Freight companies are watching closely, mapping routes and adjusting logistics plans in anticipation of the bridge’s opening. Any delay would force them to maintain reliance on existing crossings that already operate near capacity during peak periods.