WASHINGTON — In a landmark decision that resets the balance of power between the White House and the Treasury, the Supreme Court ruled Friday that President Donald Trump overstepped his constitutional authority by using emergency powers to bypass Congress on trade policy.
The 6-3 ruling specifically invalidates tariffs implemented under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) of 1977, effectively dismantling the administration’s “reciprocal” tariff strategy and its 25% “fentanyl-flow” penalties against Canada, Mexico, and China.
The Legal Core: IEEPA vs. Article I
While the President argued that the IEEPA allows him to “regulate” imports during national emergencies, Chief Justice John Roberts—leading a coalition of liberal and conservative justices—clarified that “regulation” is not a blank check for taxation.
“The president asserts the extraordinary power to unilaterally impose tariffs of unlimited amount, duration and scope,” Roberts wrote for the majority. “The administration points to no statute in which Congress has previously said that the language in IEEPA could apply to tariffs.”
By invoking the “Major Questions Doctrine,” the Court signaled that policies with such massive macroeconomic impact require explicit, granular authorization from Congress, rather than broad interpretations of 50-year-old emergency statutes.
What’s Struck Down vs. What Stays
The ruling is surgical. It does not eliminate the U.S. tariff regime entirely, but it creates a clear divide based on the statutory “hook” used:
The $130 Billion Refund Question
The immediate fallout is financial. With the IEEPA-based tariffs declared unauthorized, the federal government faces a logistical nightmare.
-
Customs Data: As of December, these specific tariffs had generated approximately $130 billion in revenue.
-
Corporate Litigation: Hundreds of entities, ranging from wine importers like V.O.S. Selections Inc. to industrial pipe suppliers, have already filed suit.
-
The Dissent: Justice Brett Kavanaugh, joined by Thomas and Alito, warned of “substantial” interim effects, noting that the Treasury may now be on the hook for billions in refunds to private companies.
Market and Political Outlook
President Trump, who recently claimed that “without tariffs, this country would be in such trouble,” now faces a significant hurdle. While he could attempt to reimpose these duties using other statutes (like Section 232), those pathways require lengthy investigations and specific “national security” justifications that may not apply to a general baseline tariff.
For the markets, this ruling provides a reprieve for importers and supply chain managers who have been navigating a volatile trade environment since January. However, it also introduces a period of uncertainty as the Treasury Department determines the mechanism for potential rebates.
