Supreme Court Blocks Trump's Tariffs in Major Setback
Supreme Court Blocks Trump's Tariffs in Major Setback
The Supreme Court curtails large parts of Trump's tariff agenda, limiting presidential power over trade in a 6-3 ruling.
In Washington, the Supreme Court delivered a 6-3 ruling that curtails large swaths of President Donald Trump's international tariff program, sharply limiting the executive branch's tariff powers under the IEEPA, a 1977 law that allows the president to regulate certain aspects of international trade during a declared national emergency.
The majority opinion, written by Chief Justice Roberts, said the administration exceeded its authority and must point to clear congressional authorization to continue or expand tariff actions. The court highlighted the constitutional guardrails on tariff policy and underscored that Congress—not the president—holds the power to tax and regulate trade.
“The president asserts the extraordinary power to unilaterally impose tariffs of unlimited amount, duration, and scope,” Roberts wrote in the majority opinion. “In light of the breadth, history, and constitutional context of that asserted authority, he must identify clear congressional authorization to exercise it.” The court also noted that no President has previously invoked IEEPA to impose tariffs of this magnitude and scope.
The ruling does not prescribe specific steps for unwinding the hundreds of punitive tariffs already in place or provide a timetable for any rollback. Instead, it returns the policy questions to Congress and raises questions about how future trade moves will be authorized and challenged in the courts.
Reactions quickly framed the decision as a significant check on executive power, potentially adding uncertainty for manufacturers, importers, and workers tied to trade policy. Supporters of a more aggressive stance on tariffs argued the ruling could hamper attempts to recalibrate relations with key partners. Legal scholars say the decision signals a stronger insistence on legislative authorization for major trade actions, while economists warn about the policy volatility that may follow as negotiators recalibrate plans.
