In the short term the Americas would have a shortage of a number of common items. I'm thinking things like lightbulbs, certain clothing items, some high tech electronics, certain minerals and other raw material. Long term though the Americas would not be in a lack of anything. The US military has a policy of sourcing everything domestically and so a great many items needed to clothe, feed, and indeed arm, a military is a matter of making do with perhaps items that in a time of greater trade would be discarded and replaced rather than repaired.
One thing to look to in how this might work is to look at the USA during World War 2. That war made overseas shipment for anything other than war materials impossible. People had to do with apples and strawberries instead of bananas and oranges. Sugar was in short supply. Fuel was in short supply but this was more about the need to use it in fighting a war than any shortage of shipments or supply. Today we can produce all the energy we need but it's simply cheaper to export oil from Alaska to Japan and import from Brazil to Texas than to ship Alaskan oil to refineries in Texas.
We have the ability to produce electronics domestically but the best and fastest electronics are from Asia. It would take years to build such facilities in the Americas. This means existing computers, cell phones and the like would become quite valuable. Also from overseas are many photovoltaic cells. Solar power would revert to the realm of pocket calculators rather than being on rooftops. 1006
With the abundance of energy from wind, coal, uranium, petroleum, and hydro this would have little effect on the price or availability of energy.
My concern would not be over what the Americas would lack but how long it would take to adapt, and that adaptation would only start once people realized that overseas shipping was indeed going to be unavailable for a very long time. After that it's a matter of some things being more expensive than before, and perhaps some becoming cheaper since the USA exports a lot of products. This means the rest of the world would likely be far worse off than the Americas, as an example the Americas export a lot of food and refined fuel.
The Middle East might have a lot of petroleum but they don't have much in refining capability. This could mean diesel fuel being very cheap in the Americas and being quite rare elsewhere. Large engines (like in a ship or power plant), boilers and heaters (residential and industrial) aren't all too picky on the quality of the fuel so they can run on the minimally processed crude we see from the Middle East. With some work a large diesel engine in something like a truck or tractor can run on this stuff. What won't work, at least for very long, are small gasoline engines, aircraft, and other items that need "clean" fuel to burn. The USA will keep flying but the rest of the world might not.
The large and varied economies in the USA, Canada, Mexico, and Brazil are highly self sufficient right now and so losing overseas trade will mean mostly that certain "luxuries" are lost to the average consumer. The basics of food, fuel, clothing, and shelter would see minimal disruptions as supply and demand for given commodities find a new balance. This means people that like tea might have to drink coffee instead. Buildings might use more concrete and brick instead of wood and drywall. I'd think the rest of the world losing access to the bananas, coffee, refined fuels, and other commodities that are quite unique to the Americas could mean big problems for the rest of the world. By not being able to export them that means they'd become cheaper where they can be sold. 479