The US Supreme Court has expressed skepticism over the legality of former President Donald Trump’s sweeping tariffs imposed under emergency powers. The court’s justices questioned whether a 1977 law meant for national emergencies gives the president the authority to impose unilateral tariffs on a global scale. Trump’s tariffs, which have reshaped global trade and increased costs for US consumers, were challenged by businesses affected by the tariffs and 12 US states.
The court’s conservative and liberal justices alike expressed deep skepticism about Trump’s use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to justify tariffs on nearly every major trading partner. Chief Justice John Roberts noted that imposing tariffs amounts to taxing Americans, a power granted to Congress. Justice Sonia Sotomayor argued that tariffs are, in fact, taxes, and the founders gave that taxing power to Congress alone.
The Trump administration defended the tariffs, arguing they are a legitimate exercise of executive power to regulate foreign commerce. However, the court’s questioning suggested that Trump’s actions may have overstepped his authority. The case has significant implications for the global economy and could redefine the scope of presidential power over trade.
A ruling in favor of Trump would grant the president broad authority to impose tariffs without congressional approval, while a ruling against him could limit the use of emergency powers for trade policy. The court’s decision is expected to have far-reaching consequences for US trade policy and the global economy.
