The Supreme Court on Friday ruled against President Donald Trump’s use of an emergency powers statute to impose open-ended tariffs, marking a major legal setback for the president’s trade policy.

In a 6-3 decision, the court rejected Trump’s claim that the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act gave him the authority to impose broad tariffs globally, saying that Congress alone has the power to lay and collect tariffs.

“The Framers [of the Constitution] recognized the unique importance of this taxing power — a power which ‘very clear[ly]’ includes the power to impose tariffs,” the ruling says.

The opinion, written by Chief Justice John Roberts, found that Congress’ taxing power cannot be handed off through vague language, rejecting the administration’s argument that the words “regulate” and “importation” in IEEPA gave the president broad powers to impose tariffs.

“Recognizing the taxing power’s unique importance, and having just fought a revolution motivated in large part by ‘taxation without representation,’ the Framers gave Congress ‘alone . . . access to the pockets of the people,’” the ruling says.

Hours after the ruling, Trump issued an executive order stating the IEEPA tariffs referenced in prior executive orders will no longer be in effect or collected. The president also directed the heads of executive departments and agencies to take the necessary steps to execute the order.

In a separate order, Trump continued the suspension of the de minimis exemption, which previously allowed imports valued at less than $800 to enter the U.S. duty-free.

The Supreme Court opinion rejected the administration’s argument that the president’s declaration of a national emergency was sufficient to unlock extraordinary tariff power that could only be restrained by a “veto-proof majority in Congress.”

“That view, if credited, would ‘represent a ‘transformative expansion’ of the President’s authority over tariff policy,” the ruling says.

Because Congress has the “power of the purse,” any transfer of broad, discretionary tariff-setting would require clear, specific statutory language, not general or ambiguous terms.

“When Congress has delegated its tariff powers, it has done so in explicit terms and subject to strict limits,” the ruling says.

By: DocMemory
Copyright © 2023 CST, Inc. All Rights Reserved