At the start of his administration in January 2025, Mr Trump imposed tariffs against Canada, Mexico and China over what he claimed was an economic emergency caused by imports of fentanyl. He then used the same economic emergency justification in April when he tariffed the whole world over trade imbalances.
The justices in the majority were categorical in their rejection of the administration’s legal arguments. Tariffs remain the preserve of the legislative branch. Congress did not, the court ruled, intend to allow the president unlimited power to declare emergencies or to impose tariffs under IEEPA.
Not all the tariffs collected on arriving goods fall under IEEPA. Tariff duties will remain in effect for products covered by Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act that concerns national security threats and by Section 301 of the Trade Act for unfair trade practices.
The Trump administration is likely to expand coverage of goods under these alternative legal statutes, but these are more restrictive.
The immediate response by the White House has been to issue a new Executive Order using Section 122 of the Trade Act to impose global 10 per cent tariffs starting on Feb 24. This statute, which has never been used before, allows for temporary tariffs for only 150 days and requires Congress to extend it thereafter.
During his press conference, Mr Trump claimed these alternative methods could allow him to impose higher tariffs rates and “take in more money”. He also repeatedly referenced his executive powers, saying that he was “allowed” to cut off all trade with a country or impose an embargo.
https://www.channelnewsasia.com/commentary/trump-tariffs-illegal-supreme-court-new-snap-insight-5943816
