US News Metro Long Island Politics

Sports NFL MLB Olympics NBA NHL College Football College Basketball WNBA

Business Personal Finance

Entertainment TV Movies Music Celebrities Awards Theater

Lifestyle Weird But True Sex & Relationships Viral Trends Human Interest Parenting Fashion & Beauty Food & Drink Travel

Health Wellness Fitness Health Care Medicine Men’s Health Women’s Health Mental Health Nutrition

Science Space Environment Wildlife Archaeology

Today’s Paper Covers Columnists Horoscopes Crosswords & Games Sports Odds Podcasts Careers

Email Newsletters Official Store Home Delivery Tips

Trump has lost the tariff battle but not the tariff war

The Supreme Court’s tariff decision landed about where conventional wisdom said it would: The justices ruled 6–3 that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act simply doesn’t give the president the sweeping authority the Trump administration claimed. That’s not a political rebuke. It’s a legal one, and a narrow one at that.

Chief Justice John Roberts put the bottom line plainly: “We hold that IEEPA does not authorize the President to impose tariffs.”

That’s it. Not that tariffs are unconstitutional. Not that Trump’s trade agenda is illegitimate. Just that this particular statute doesn’t do the work the administration wanted it to do.

The core of the majority’s reasoning is straightforward and, frankly, hard to argue with. Article I gives Congress the power to tax, and tariffs are taxes.

As Roberts explained, “The power to impose tariffs is ‘very clear[ly] . . . a branch of the taxing power.’” The administration conceded the president has no inherent authority to impose tariffs. So everything turned on whether Congress clearly delegated that power in IEEPA.

Trump to sign new 10% global tariff after Supreme Court defeat

Trump goes on blistering attack against Supreme Court justices after tariff ruling: ‘Unpatriotic and disloyal to our Constitution’

European trade pact with Trump scrambled by Supreme Court tariff ruling

IEEPA authorizes the president to “investigate, block… regulate, direct and compel, nullify, void, prevent or prohibit” various economic transactions. But, as the court noted, “Absent from this lengthy list of........

© New York Post