The highest court in the United States determined this Friday that President Donald Trump exceeded his powers by imposing widespread tariffs without legislative authorization, considering that the law invoked by the White House does not support that power.
The decision, adopted by six votes to three, represents a significant setback for the president’s commercial strategy.
The ruling concludes that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) does not enable the Executive to establish unlimited scope taxes on imports. The president of the court, John Robertswrote the majority opinion, which was joined by progressive judges and conservatives. Amy Coney Barrett and Neil Gorsuchaccording to cnn.
“The president has the extraordinary power to unilaterally impose tariffs of unlimited amount, duration and scope,” Roberts said. “In light of the breadth, history, and constitutional context of that power, you must identify clear congressional authorization to exercise it.” The majority added that the emergency “is insufficient” to justify this measure.
The ruling rejects the central argument of the Trump administration, which defended that the term “regulate” imports, contained in the emergency law of the 1970s, implicitly included the possibility of establishing tariffs.
For the court, when Congress delegates that power, it does so expressly and under specific conditions. “It did neither in this case,” said Roberts, who stressed that the court does not claim “any special jurisdiction in economic matters or foreign relations,” but rather fulfills the role assigned by the Constitution.
They voted in dissent Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Brett Kavanaugh. The latter warned that the court did not resolve what will happen with the billions of dollars already collected or the procedure for eventual returns, a point that will likely remain in the hands of lower levels.
Until mid-December, the Government had received 134 billion through the contested tariffs, applied to more than 301 thousand importers, according to data from the Customs and Border Protection Office cited by cnn.
Nothing clear about returns
In mid-January, Trump said in his Truth Social account that if the Supreme Court decided to annul the tariffs that it ordered implemented in 2025, it would be “practically impossible” to return the amounts collected from importers.
“The actual figures we would have to pay if, for any reason, the Supreme Court ruled against the United States on tariffs would run into hundreds of billions of dollars,” the president said.
Based on calculations for Reuters and cited by The Country, Economists at the Penn-Wharton Budget Model estimate that the US administration could face rebates of up to $175 billion.
With today’s decision, an immediate mechanism for reimbursements is not established, although the administration had indicated that it could face them if necessary, even if the process was complex.
The case examined so-called “Liberation Day” tariffs and other levies imposed on imports from China, Mexico and Canada, as well as so-called “reciprocal” tariffs, which raised rates up to 50% for some trading partners and up to 145% for China in 2025.
According to the media outlet, affected companies maintained that the measure constituted an unprecedented expansion of presidential power by establishing taxes without legislative control.
The ruling aligns with recent precedents in which the court required explicit authorization from Congress for executive decisions of great economic impact. Although the president has other legal tools to impose tariffs, these include time limits or specific conditions that were not used in this case.
The resolution closes, at least for now, the emergency route used by the White House and redefines the scope of presidential powers in commercial matters, in one of the most relevant economic litigation that the court has examined in recent years.
