Supreme Court Rejects Trump Tariffs; President Vows New 10% Global Duty
The Supreme Court handed a 6-3 rebuke to the president, striking down broad import levies and nullifying the trump tariffs that had applied to goods from nearly every country; the president immediately pledged a new 10% global tariff to replace the duties the court outlawed.
Trump Tariffs overturned in 6-3 decision
The justices found that the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) did not give the executive branch authority to impose the sweeping import taxes the administration announced last year. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote that when Congress delegates tariff powers, it has done so "in explicit terms and subject to strict limits, " and that imposing tariffs in peacetime belongs to Congress.
Legal routes and a 10% fallback
The president said he would turn to other laws after the ruling, unveiling plans for a new 10% global baseline tariff and saying the administration would launch investigations into unfair trading practices that could lead to permanent duties. One pathway mentioned is Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, which allows a president to impose tariffs for 150 days; the president described the move as a replacement for the struck-down measures.
Business fallout, refunds and the road ahead
Businesses and several US states that challenged the levies welcomed the decision, which opens the possibility of billions of dollars in refunds for importers hit by the earlier duties. The president warned, however, that refunds would not come without a legal fight and said he expected the matter to be tied up in court for years.
The tariffs at issue had been expanded dramatically after initially targeting Mexico, Canada and China, with the administration at one point marking the broader rollout on what it called "Liberation Day" last April. Critics had argued in court that the IEEPA makes no mention of the word "tariffs" and does not grant the executive an open-ended power to upend long-standing trade rules.
After the decision, the president sharply criticized the court in public remarks, using strong language to describe the justices; other comments from the president framed the ruling as a spur to pursue "great alternatives. " The court majority emphasized the "major questions doctrine, " saying the executive cannot rely on ambiguous statutory language to justify sweeping economic measures that touch the core congressional power of the purse.
the administration will initiate the investigations that Section 122 permits and pursue other statutory avenues to impose duties; those steps are the next confirmed actions the president has announced following the court's 6-3 ruling.
