In a landmark decision with far-reaching implications for executive power and international trade, the U.S. Supreme Court has rejected President Donald Trump's sweeping global tariffs imposed under emergency authority. The 6-3 ruling on Friday represents the first major piece of Trump's agenda to come before the nation's highest court, which the president himself helped shape with three conservative appointments during his first term.
Constitutional Check on Executive Authority
The majority opinion, written by Chief Justice John Roberts, found that the Constitution "very clearly" grants Congress the exclusive power to impose taxes, which includes tariffs. "The Framers did not vest any part of the taxing power in the Executive Branch," Roberts wrote in the decision that struck down tariffs imposed under the emergency powers law.
Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, Neil Gorsuch, Amy Coney Barrett, and Ketanji Brown Jackson joined Roberts in the majority. The decision specifically targets reciprocal tariffs that Trump imposed on nearly every country in the world, citing trade deficits as a national emergency.
Dissenting Voices and Legal Arguments
Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas, and Brett Kavanaugh dissented from the majority opinion. In his dissent, Kavanaugh argued that "The tariffs at issue here may or may not be wise policy. But as a matter of text, history, and precedent, they are clearly lawful."
The Trump administration had cited a 1977 law that allows the president to regulate importation during an emergency, which also permits the setting of tariffs. While past presidents have used this law to impose sanctions, Trump represents the first executive to invoke it specifically for import taxes.
Economic Impact and Political Context
The Congressional Budget Office estimates that the economic impact of Trump's tariffs could reach $3 trillion over the next decade. According to federal data from December, the U.S. Department of the Treasury has collected more than $133 million from tariffs imposed under the emergency powers law.
Trump has been vocal about the case, stating that anyone ruling against him would deliver an economic blow to the United States. However, polling indicates that tariffs remain unpopular with the general public amid broader concerns about affordability and economic stability.
Limitations and Future Implications
Importantly, Friday's Supreme Court ruling does not prevent Trump from imposing duties under other legal authorities. While these alternative mechanisms impose more limitations on the speed and severity of presidential actions, administration officials expect to maintain the tariff framework using other statutory powers.
The decision comes despite a series of short-term victories on the Supreme Court's emergency docket that have allowed Trump to flex executive power on issues ranging from high-profile firings to federal funding cuts. This ruling establishes a significant constitutional boundary on presidential authority in matters of taxation and international trade.
The tariffs in question were implemented in April 2025, when Trump imposed what he termed reciprocal tariffs on most countries in response to trade deficits he declared a national emergency. These measures followed earlier tariffs on Canada, China, and Mexico that Trump justified as addressing what he deemed a drug trafficking emergency.
