The Supreme Court struck down President Donald Trump’s sweeping global tariffs on Friday, Feb. 20, dealing a significant setback on an issue central to his economic agenda, the AP reported.
The conservative-majority Supreme Court ruled in a six-three ruling that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act “does not authorize the president to impose tariffs.”
The 6-3 decision concerns tariffs imposed under the Emergency Powers Act, including the broad “reciprocal” tariffs it enacted for nearly all trading partners.
The majority agreed that the Constitution “very clearly” grants Congress the power to impose taxes, including tariffs. “The Framers did not delegate any part of the taxing power to the executive branch,” wrote Chief Justice John Roberts.
Read also | Trump’s first reaction to US Supreme Court tariff decision – ‘Have a backup plan’
The two Trump appointees, Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett β along with Roberts and the court’s three liberals in the majority. Meanwhile, Justices Brett Kavanaugh, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented.
“These tariffs may or may not be wise policy. But as a matter of text, history and precedent, they are clearly legal,” the news outlet quoted Kavanaugh as saying in the dissent.
“When Congress grants the power to impose tariffs, it does so clearly and with careful limitations,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in the court’s majority opinion. βIt did neither here.
Read also | Trump and Indonesia’s Prabowo finalize trade deal, cut tariff to 19%
Refunds will be a mess
Kavanaugh noted that the refund process was “probably a ‘mess,'” as confirmed at oral argument.
“The court is saying nothing today about whether, and if so, how the government should proceed to return the billions of dollars it collected from importers. But the process is likely to be a mess,” as acknowledged at oral argument, PTI quoted Justice Kavanaugh as saying.
At the core of his economic policy, Trump imposed what he called “reciprocal” tariffs on most countries in April 2025 to deal with trade deficits and declared a national emergency. These followed his duties in Canada, China and Mexico, ostensibly to tackle the drug-trafficking crisis.
A series of lawsuits followed, including one from a dozen mostly Democratic states and others involving small businesses selling everything from plumbing supplies and educational toys to women’s cycling apparel.
Challengers argued that the emergency powers law did not even mention tariffs, and Trump’s use of it failed several legal tests, including one that invalidated then-President Joe Biden’s $500 billion student loan forgiveness program, Bloomberg reported.
How did the White House react to the decision?
The White House has said it will quickly replace the levies with alternative legal measures, although the backup options are generally more cumbersome or limited than the sweeping powers Trump sought under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, the news outlet noted.
The decision could reduce the average effective tariff rate in the US by more than 50%. A Bloomberg Economics analysis before the ruling estimated that a broad ruling against Trump could lower the rate from 13.6% to 6.5%.