That’s left trade policy watchers in Washington and foreign capitals wondering what role, if any, Lighthizer will play in trade and economic policy for the Trump administration, after serving as a driving force throughout the campaign. And it’s raising some doubts about just how aggressively the president-elect will pursue the dramatic, Lighthizer-backed tariff increases he promised incessantly before the election.

“I was assuming that if [Lighthizer] didn’t go back to USTR, he’d end up in the White House as some kind of trade czar, but this sounds as though Lutnick is going to be that,” said Bill Reinsch, a former Clinton-era Commerce official who’s now at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. “So, what’s left for Bob?”

The possibility of a Lighthizer snub on Wednesday restarted a pressure campaign from figures across the political spectrum, who have been critical of the consensus around free trade in Washington for decades. Matthew Schmitz, founder of the populist right magazine Compact, penned a New York Times op-ed pleading with Trump to bring back the former trade chief to a Cabinet role. And Peter Harrell, President Joe Biden’s former international trade adviser, also endorsed a Lighthizer return, writing on X that Lighthizer “has vision, is skilled at managing government, gets negotiations, and knows how to use things like exclusions to mitigate some unintended harms.”

Not picking Lighthizer for a top economic role would be a signal that Trump may not follow through on the aggressive trade proposals he made a centerpiece of his campaign — like a 20 percent across-the-board tariff and duties at least three times higher on China. Lighthizer and his team were instrumental in crafting those ideas and have been working behind the scenes to prepare executive orders to carry out such tariff increases, as well as the economic justification for them.

Lighthizer did not respond to a request for comment, and his allies note that he’s not out of contention for a top job yet.

Lighthizer “was a critical figure to the first administration and the president knows that,” said one person close to Lighthizer, granted anonymity to discuss delicate personnel issues. “It’s not like he’s forgotten all the work Bob has done or how much they’ve talked over the last few years.”

Trump has grown frustrated with the constant jockeying among Wall Street figures competing for the Treasury secretary nod, and is wary of their past statements denigrating tariffs and promoting free trade. That could open up a lane for a more protectionist alternative like Lighthizer, though other alternatives — like financier Marc Rowan, or Sen. Bill Hagerty (R-Tenn.) — are seen as more likely. If not Treasury secretary, he could still be named as Trump’s trade representative or a non-confirmable White House adviser post, although, at least in theory, such roles would report to Lutnick.

But as USTR veterans point out, Trump and previous presidents have also sought to elevate the Commerce Department over USTR on trade issues. In 2017, Trump’s transition said that then-Commerce Secretary pick Wilbur Ross would oversee the trade portfolio, and even represent the U.S. in the renegotiation of the North American Free Trade Agreement — a role that would typically fall to the trade chief. None of that ultimately happened; Lighthizer emerged as the more influential adviser on trade policy, not only renegotiating NAFTA with Canada and Mexico, but leading the high-stakes talks on the deal in Congress. A similar scenario could happen this time around, they say.

“I went through this in 2015. I was working in the Senate, and I recall that President Obama then put forward a reorganization plan where he wanted to … fold USTR into Commerce,” Everett Eissenstat, former deputy assistant to President Trump for international economic affairs, said on a Wednesday webinar. “[Capitol] Hill was very, very ... adamantly against it. ... Clinton tried it. Reagan tried it.”

Already, some senior trade lawmakers are saying they will fight any effort from Trump to relegate USTR to a role below Commerce — something they say can only be done by Congress, not the president himself.

“I think keeping the independence of USTR is very important, but also it is an offshoot of congressional authority,” said Rep. Richard Neal, the top Democrat on the House Ways and Means Committee, which oversees trade. USTR, he added “was constructed by Congress, and the only way it can be deconstructed is by Congress.”