In what some are describing as a “splintered” decision, the U.S. Supreme Court has struck down the tariff policies of the Trump Administration by a vote of 6-3.
The court ruled the tariffs exceed the powers given to the President by Congress under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), a 1977 law that allows the authority to regulate commerce during national emergencies. The decision strikes down “reciprocal” country-by-country tariffs and a 25% fentanyl-linked tariff on Canada, Mexico, and China.
Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Amy Coney Barrett and Neil Gorsuch joined the court’s three liberals, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson, in the majority. Justices Brett Kavanaugh, Clarence Thomas, and Samuel Alito dissented.
“The President asserts the extraordinary power to unilaterally impose tariffs of unlimited amount, duration, and scope. In light of the breadth, history, and constitutional context of that asserted authority, he must identify clear congressional authorization to exercise it,” Roberts wrote in his opinion, saying the 1977 law “falls short” of the Congressional approval that would be needed.
He added, “”The Framers gave that power to ‘Congress alone’ — notwithstanding the obvious foreign affairs implications of tariffs. And whatever may be said of other powers that implicate foreign affairs, we would not expect Congress to relinquish its tariff power through vague language, or without careful limits.”
The ruling wipes out the 10 percent tariff Trump imposed on nearly every country in the world, and includes specific tariffs on other countries, like Canada, Mexico and China, which are higher than 10%. Tariffs with Canada involving cars, aluminum, and steel are not a part of this ruling.
Justice Kavanaugh authored a strong dissenting opinion, describing the Supreme Court vote with “serious practical consequences” in terms of refunding the potentially $200 billion in tariffs already assessed. “The United States may be required to refund billions of dollars to importers who paid the IEEPA tariffs, even though some importers may have already passed on costs to consumers or others,” Kavanaugh wrote. “As was acknowledged at oral argument, the refund process is likely to be a ‘mess.’”
Kavanaugh added, “The Court today concludes that the President checked the wrong statutory box by relying on IEEPA rather than another statute to impose these tariffs.” The administration can reimpose tariffs under alternate statutory authority.