US Supreme Court strikes down Trump's global tariffs

The Supreme Court on Friday struck down President Donald Trump’s sweeping tariffs imposed under a law intended for national emergencies, ruling that he exceeded his authority in a decision with major economic and political ramifications.

In a 6-3 opinion written by Chief Justice John Roberts, the court upheld a lower court’s determination that Trump’s use of the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA, to impose import taxes unilaterally was unlawful.

The ruling marked a significant setback for the Republican president’s aggressive use of executive power in his second term.

U.S. President Donald Trump called the Supreme Court ruling on his sweeping global tariffs a "disgrace" on Friday after the decision came during his meeting with state governors, sources familiar with the matter said.

The court concluded that the Trump administration’s interpretation of IEEPA would intrude on Congress’s constitutional authority over tariffs and violate the “major questions” doctrine.

That doctrine, embraced by the court’s conservative majority in recent years, requires clear congressional authorization for executive branch actions of vast economic and political significance.

Quoting a prior decision, Roberts wrote that “the president must ‘point to clear congressional authorization’ to justify his extraordinary assertion of the power to impose tariffs.” He added: “He cannot.”

The Constitution grants Congress the authority to levy taxes and tariffs. Trump instead relied on IEEPA, which allows a president to regulate commerce during a declared national emergency. The law does not explicitly mention tariffs.

Dissent and lineup

The three dissenting justices were Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Brett Kavanaugh.

Joining Roberts in the majority were conservative Justices Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett, along with the court’s three liberal members.

The Supreme Court, which holds a 6-3 conservative majority, had previously sided with Trump in several emergency rulings since his return to office in January 2025.

Economic fallout and refunds

Trump’s tariffs were projected to generate trillions of dollars in revenue over the next decade. Economists at the Penn-Wharton Budget Model estimated Friday that more than $175 billion had been collected under IEEPA-based tariffs. That money likely would need to be refunded following the court’s decision.

The Congressional Budget Office had estimated that all current tariffs, including those imposed under IEEPA, would raise about $300 billion annually over the next decade.

Total U.S. net customs duty receipts reached a record $195 billion in fiscal 2025, which ended Sept. 30, according to Treasury Department data.

Legal challenges

The decision arose from challenges filed by small businesses and 12 Democratic-led states. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit sided with five small importers in one case and with states including Arizona, Colorado, New York, and Oregon in another.

Separately, a federal judge in Washington ruled in favor of Learning Resources, a family-owned toy company.

Trump became the first president to use IEEPA to impose tariffs. Historically, the law has been used to freeze assets or impose sanctions on foreign adversaries.

The administration had argued that IEEPA’s grant of authority to “regulate” imports during emergencies encompassed tariffs. The court rejected that view.

Trade strategy disrupted

Trump has made tariffs central to his economic and foreign policy agenda, launching a global trade war after beginning his second term. He described the import taxes as essential to national economic security and leverage in negotiations.

In April, on what he called “Liberation Day,” Trump announced “reciprocal” tariffs on most U.S. trading partners, citing a national emergency related to longstanding trade deficits.

Earlier in 2025, he invoked IEEPA to impose tariffs on China, Canada, and Mexico, citing fentanyl trafficking and other illicit drugs as a national emergency.

The administration signaled it may seek alternative statutory authorities to preserve portions of the tariff regime, including provisions allowing tariffs on imports deemed threats to national security or in response to unfair trade practices.

Those alternatives, however, may not offer the same breadth or speed as IEEPA.

The ruling leaves in place other tariffs Trump imposed under separate laws, which account for roughly one-third of tariff revenue based on government data from October to mid-December.

IEEPA was enacted by Congress and signed into law by President Jimmy Carter. In passing it, lawmakers placed limits on presidential authority compared with earlier emergency statutes.

The court’s decision sharply curtails Trump’s ability to wield emergency powers to reshape global trade without congressional approval, reinforcing the constitutional boundary between the executive and legislative branches.