The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that President Trump cannot use the IEEPA to impose sweeping tariffs, significantly limiting his executive authority on trade and foreign policy.

Supreme Court Delivers Blow to Presidential Tariff Powers

In a landmark 6-3 decision issued on Friday, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down President Donald Trump's use of executive orders to impose broad tariffs on imports from various countries.

The justices determined that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), a 1977 law, does not grant the president authority to levy tariffs, even during declared national emergencies related to foreign threats like drug trafficking from Canada, Mexico, and China, or trade imbalances.

Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the majority, emphasized that IEEPA's language allowing the president to "regulate... importation" does not extend to imposing duties or taxes, powers explicitly reserved for Congress under the Constitution.

He noted that no previous president had interpreted the law this way, underscoring the ruling's grounding in historical practice and statutory text.

Details of the Ruling and Dissenting Views

The case, Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump, stemmed from challenges by importers affected by the 25% tariffs on goods tied to the administration's emergency declarations.

The Court affirmed that tariff imposition is a core congressional function, rejecting the administration's broad reading of IEEPA.

Justices clarified that while the U.S. Court of International Trade holds jurisdiction over related disputes, including potential refunds processed by Customs and Border Protection, the core authority claim failed.

In dissent, Justice Kavanaugh argued that IEEPA's text, historical precedents, and the major questions doctrine supported Trump's actions, particularly in foreign affairs.

He contended the law provided sweeping powers, but the majority countered that Congress must speak clearly on such significant delegations.

This splintered opinion highlights ongoing tensions over executive power limits.

Far-Reaching Impacts on Trade and Policy

The decision disrupts a key pillar of Trump's economic strategy, which relied on these tariffs to negotiate reciprocal deals with 19 countries, securing commitments like South Korea's $350 billion investment pledge and the European Union's $550 billion in strategic sectors.

Importers now eye refunds, though the process remains unclear, injecting uncertainty into global supply chains.

Tariffs under other laws, such as Section 301 of the Trade Act or Section 232, persist unaffected, giving the administration alternative tools.

Politically, the ruling arrives ahead of the State of the Union address, where Trump is expected to respond.

He has hinted at foreign influences swaying the Court, calling it a setback to making America strong.

"The Supreme Court said they do not authorize them. That is a constitutional power that belongs to Congress," remarked a congressional representative, stressing the need for legislative clarity on trade measures.

Lawmakers from both parties weighed in, with some praising the check on executive overreach and others decrying limits on rapid response to threats.

This ruling reins in presidential trade authority under IEEPA, mandates clearer congressional intent for major actions, preserves other tariff mechanisms, and prompts questions about future negotiations and refunds, reshaping U.S. foreign policy dynamics.

• Tags
• #Politics
• #Law
• #Trade