The Supreme Court struck down President Donald Trump’s far-reaching global tariffs on Friday, handing him a significant loss on an issue crucial to his economic agenda.
The 6-3 decision centers on the tariffs Trump unilaterally imposed under an emergency powers law, including the sweeping “reciprocal” tariffs levied on nearly every other country.
It’s the first major piece of Trump’s broad agenda to come squarely before the nation’s highest court, which he helped shape with the appointments of three conservative jurists in his first term.
The majority found that the Constitution “very clearly” gives Congress the power to impose taxes, which include tariffs. “The Framers did not vest any part of the taxing power in the Executive Branch,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote.
“The tariffs at issue here may or may not be wise policy. But as a matter of text, history, and precedent, they are clearly lawful,” Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote in the dissent.
What to know:
Can Trump still impose tariffs? Yes, but not under the fast-acting law he previously used. Top administration officials have said they expect to keep the tariff framework in place under other authorities, though alternative laws carry greater limitations on the speed and severity of Trump’s actions.
What was the impact of Trump’s tariffs? As of December, federal data shows that the Treasury Department had collected more than $133 billion from the tariffs. The tariffs were estimated to have an economic impact of some $3 trillion over the next decade, according to the Congressional Budget Office.
Will business get a refund? The majority ruling did not address whether companies could get refunded for the billions they have collectively paid in tariffs. In his dissent, Justice Kavanaugh noted the process was “likely to be a ‘mess.’”
What did each side argue? The Justice Department argued that a 1977 law allowing the president to regulate imports during emergencies also includes setting tariffs. The challengers argued that the law doesn’t even mention tariffs and that Trump’s use of it fails several legal tests, including one that doomed then-President Joe Biden’s $500 billion student loan forgiveness program.
Friday’s decision upends a core set of tariffs that Trump imposed using the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA. That includes the “Liberation Day” tariffs the president slapped on nearly every country in the world last spring — as well as and other IEEPA-based levies he imposed on Canada, Mexico and China. Trump also cited IEEPA to impose additional tariffs on Brazil over the trial of former President Jair Bolsonaro, and on India over its purchases of Russian oil.
Despite Friday’s ruling, other sweeping levies remain in place. Trump used another law — Section 232 of the 1962 Trade Expansion Act — to slap impose sectoral tariffs on steel and aluminum, cars, copper, lumber and products like kitchen cabinets worldwide. And the president has plenty of other options to keep taxing imports aggressively.
About 6 in 10 Americans said Trump had “gone too far” on imposing new tariffs on other countries, according to an AP-NORC poll from January.
About 9 in 10 Democrats and roughly 6 in 10 independents said Trump had overstepped, compared to 25% of Republicans.
The tariffs have been unpopular for much of Trump’s first year back in office. Roughly half of U.S. adults said they were opposed to imposing tariffs on all goods brought into the U.S. in an AP-NORC poll from last April. Only about 3 in 10 favored them, and roughly 2 in 10 were neutral.
Possibly more worrisome for a president elected on the promise of fixing Americans’ affordability concerns, 76% in the April poll thought Trump’s tariff policies would increase the cost of U.S. consumer goods.
President Trump still has options to keep taxing imports aggressively even after the Supreme Court struck down the tariffs he imposed last year on nearly every country on earth.
The Justices didn’t buy the president’s sweeping claims of authority to impose tariffs as he sees fit. But Trump can re-use tariff powers he deployed in his first term and can reach for others, including one that dates back to the Great Depression.
“It’s hard to see any pathway here where tariffs end,” said Georgetown trade law professor Kathleen Claussen. “I am pretty convinced he could rebuild the tariff landscape he has now using other authorities.”
