Trump’s tariff agenda reaches the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court is set to hear arguments later today in a blockbuster case centered around the fate of most of President Trump’s signature tariff policies.

SCOTUS’ eventual decision in this morning’s case has the potential to reshape the US economy, global diplomacy, and future presidential power.

How we got here: Earlier this year, a coalition of small business owners and Democrat-led states sued the Trump administration over the president’s legal authority to impose wide-ranging “reciprocal” tariffs in early April, which targeted goods from nearly every country in the world.

• Congress holds exclusive power to levy taxes on citizens and tariffs on imports under the Constitution, with limited exceptions giving presidents some discretion during times of national emergency.
• The key question in today’s case is whether the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act grants US presidents the ability to declare an emergency that allows them to unilaterally set tariffs.

The arguments

President Trump and his administration argue that the 1977 law’s broad text—which gives the president authority to “regulate” the “importation” of goods to protect national security—allows Trump to impose wide-ranging tariffs, as long as he declares a national emergency.

• They also argue reciprocal tariffs are necessary to counter the national emergency posed by unfair foreign trade practices, and that US courts should defer to executive power in economic and foreign affairs.
• In a social media post yesterday, Trump said the US would be "virtually defenseless" against other nations if the Court strikes down most of his tariffs, describing the case as “literally, LIFE OR DEATH.”

On the flip side: Democratic lawmakers, some business owners, and three previous court rulings contend that Trump’s reciprocal tariff plan exceeds his presidential authority under the Constitution.

• They say the 1977 law doesn’t justify sweeping trade actions without Congress’s approval, and warn that upholding his actions would set a dangerous precedent of expanded presidential power.
• Critics also cite harm to consumers, businesses, and global trade stability.

What’s at stake

Analysts say a decision in favor of Trump would have far-reaching impacts beyond trade policy, and could shape whether the use of emergency powers to bypass Congress becomes a routine tool of governance for US presidents moving forward.

A ruling against Trump could also carry a significant impact.

• Along with greatly restricting the president’s powers in imposing tariffs, it could set off a chaotic refund process, result in a loss of record-high tariff revenue, and undermine recent US trade deals.
• However—the Trump admin says that in the event its tariffs are struck down by SCOTUS, officials will work to replace them using other, more process-heavy trade laws.

Looking ahead…Oral arguments before SCOTUS begin at 9 am CT. The Court’s final decision is expected sometime before the end of its term in late June.

📊 Flash poll: In your opinion, how should the Supreme Court handle the legality of President Trump’s reciprocal tariff plan?

• Uphold it as is
• Uphold it with small changes
• Strike it down entirely
• Unsure/other