US Supreme Court Questions Legality of Trump Tariffs in Landmark Case

The US Supreme Court began a high-stakes hearing on Wednesday to determine whether President Donald Trump’s sweeping tariffs were legally imposed, a case that could redefine the scope of presidential authority over trade policy.

At the heart of the case is Trump’s decision to invoke emergency powers under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to enforce “reciprocal” tariffs on nearly all major US trading partners — including China, Mexico, and Canada. The move dramatically increased import levies and marked a turning point in America’s trade relations.

Billions of dollars in customs revenue and the balance of power between Congress and the presidency now hang in the balance. Trump has called the case “one of the most important in US history,” warning of economic consequences if his tariffs are overturned.

During the hearing, the nine justices questioned whether the president had overstepped his authority. Several raised concerns about the “major questions doctrine,” which requires Congress to explicitly authorize significant economic or political decisions.

Trump’s Solicitor General, John Sauer, argued that the president acted within his constitutional powers to regulate foreign commerce and respond to global economic emergencies. “Congress has long intended for the president to have broad authority in foreign trade matters,” Sauer told the court.

However, opponents of the Trump tariffs — including businesses, lawmakers, and former officials — contend that the IEEPA does not authorize the president to unilaterally impose taxes or tariffs. They argue that such powers belong solely to Congress under the US Constitution. Roughly 40 legal briefs have been filed challenging the tariffs, with only a handful supporting them.

Analysts say the court’s ruling could take months but will have profound implications. If the court sides with Trump, it could cement an expansive interpretation of presidential power in trade and economic crises. A ruling against him could limit future presidents’ ability to impose tariffs without congressional approval.

The Trump administration maintains that its tariff policy strengthened America’s position in global trade and curbed unfair practices. Critics, however, say the tariffs increased import costs and hurt small businesses, even if they didn’t trigger widespread inflation.

As the legal battle continues, industry groups and trading partners are watching closely. “This case could reshape how the United States conducts trade diplomacy for decades to come,” said one trade analyst.

The Supreme Court’s final decision will not only determine the fate of Trump’s tariffs but could also redefine the limits of executive power in America’s economic policymaking.