Sign Up Account Profile Log Out

Newsletters Morning Report 12:30 Report Evening Report Business Defense Health Care Technology Newsletter Energy & Environment Whole Hog Politics The Gavel The Movement

Technology Newsletter

NEWS Senate House Administration Courts Future America Media Campaign News Education In The Know Latino LGBTQ DC News Race & Politics State Watch Print Edition People in the News

POLICY Defense Health Care Energy & Environment Technology Transportation International Cybersecurity National Security Space Sustainability

BUSINESS Budget Taxes Personal Finance Lobbying

OPINION Columnists Congress Blog All Contributors Opinions – Campaign Opinions – Civil Rights Opinions – Criminal Justice Opinions – Cybersecurity Opinions – Education Opinions – Energy and Environment Opinions – Finance Opinions – Healthcare Opinions – Immigration Opinions – International Opinions – Judiciary Opinions – National Security Opinions – Technology Opinions – White House Submit Opinion Content

All Contributors Opinions – Campaign Opinions – Civil Rights Opinions – Criminal Justice Opinions – Cybersecurity Opinions – Education Opinions – Energy and Environment Opinions – Finance Opinions – Healthcare Opinions – Immigration Opinions – International Opinions – Judiciary Opinions – National Security Opinions – Technology Opinions – White House

Opinions – Civil Rights

Opinions – Criminal Justice

Opinions – Cybersecurity

Opinions – Energy and Environment

Opinions – Healthcare

Opinions – Immigration

Opinions – International

Opinions – National Security

Opinions – Technology

Opinions – White House

Submit Opinion Content

EVENTS Upcoming Events About

Sign Up Account Profile Log Out

Live updates: State of the Union

Content from Google Cloud

Opinion 5 takeaways from the Supreme Court’s tariff smackdown  Opinions - Supreme Court | 1 minute ago

Progressive group backs Talarico in Texas Senate race  Campaign | 1 minute ago

Savannah Guthrie says family is offering up to $1 million for info leading to missing mom’s ‘recovery’ Nexstar Media Wire News | 7 minutes ago

Watch live: House convenes hearing on security ahead of FIFA World Cup Video | 26 minutes ago

Opinion Washington doesn’t need another rich man’s golf course Opinion | 31 minutes ago

Isaac Hayes estate says lawsuit against Trump over song use at rallies settled In The Know | 36 minutes ago

Ukraine marks 4 years of Russia’s war, Zelensky says nation ‘not broken’ International | 36 minutes ago

Former UK ambassador released on bail after arrest in Epstein investigations International | 44 minutes ago

5 takeaways from the Supreme Court’s tariff smackdown 

The U.S. Supreme Court’s 6-3 ruling against President Trump’s use of tariffs revealed the best of the court — and the worst in Trump. The decision will have far-reaching implications. Here are five.

First, the decision was a victory for the U.S. Constitution. Writing for the majority, Chief Justice John Roberts, joined by conservative Justices Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett, got it right for all the right reasons. The three liberal justices — Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson — got it right but for all the wrong reasons.

Roberts delivered his opinion orally, which stressed its importance. His two key points: The Constitution vests the power to tax — and tariffs are taxes — in Congress. Also, under the court’s “major questions doctrine,” any expansive use of tariffs must have clear and explicit authorization from Congress. Congress did not pass Trump’s tariffs and, given the recent anti-tariff vote on Canada, it probably wouldn’t.

The court’s three lefties have never embraced the major questions doctrine, so they justified their opposition to Trump’s tariffs on other grounds.

Second, the three dissenting conservative justices — Clarence Thomas, Smauel Alito and Brett Kavanaugh — got it wrong for all the wrong reasons. They ignored the major questions doctrine, which all three supported previously in decisions against former President Joe Biden’s administration.

The court first used the term “major questions doctrine” in 2022, asserting that when an “agency seeks to decide an issue of major national significance [whether economic or political], its action must be supported by clear congressional authorization.” That doctrine is necessary because recent presidents have increasingly tried to overreach their constitutional authority.

The dissenting justices argued that the law Trump used to justify most of his tariffs allows the president to “regulate importation,” which they claimed included imposing tariffs, even though the law makes no mention of tariffs. Had Trump used the law to impose tariffs on a couple of countries, he likely wouldn’t have been challenged. But he used the law expansively to impose tariffs on any and every country for any reason or for no reason. That’s exactly the kind of practice the six conservatives had used the major questions doctrine to stop.

Third, the challenge of returning the tariffs collected under the law was not a justification for supporting the administration’s actions.

Hoping to sway the justices, both Trump and others in the administration repeatedly claimed that returning the $135 billion taken in tariffs would be extremely complicated. Several news stories cited Kavanaugh’s dissent that returning the money would be “a mess.”

But maybe not. Cato Institute economist Scott Lincicome explains, “With almost all duty payments now made electronically, and with every IEEPA-related import assigned a specific tariff code, U.S. Customs and Border Protection could return most of the money owed to importers, with interest, at the push of a button.”

Fourth, Trump’s press conference in response to the ruling was an embarrassment for him, not for the six justices who ruled against him. But first, let’s review the history of the case. 

Trump lost this case before the trade experts at the Court of International Trade. In a unanimous decision last May, the court ruled, “An unlimited delegation of tariff authority would constitute an improper abdication of legislative power to another branch of government,” which is also what the Supreme Court concluded.

When Trump appealed the decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the lower court’s decision, though it delayed enforcement until October. Thus, Trump was 0 for 2 going to the Supreme Court.

Yet he attacked the six justices in the majority, reserving his strongest criticisms for the three conservatives, two of whom he appointed.

When asked by a reporter about those two conservatives Trump said, “I think their decision was terrible. Yeah. I think it’s an embarrassment to their families.” 

He also derided the three liberal justices, “They also are a, frankly, disgrace to our nation, those justices.” And he added, “It’s my opinion that the court has been swayed by foreign interests …”

But it is Trump’s sons, not members of the court, who are making multi-billion dollar business deals with “foreign interests.” 

Finally, Trump quickly imposed 10 percent tariffs across the board under a different law, referred to as Section 122, and then raised them to 15 percent. The law requires Congress to approve the tariffs within 150 days, allowing Democrats to connect higher consumer prices to Trump’s tariffs right before the midterm election.

A new Gallup poll finds that “By a wide margin, Americans continue to say they disapprove of the Trump administration substantially increasing tariffs: 60% say this, including 39% who say they strongly disapprove.” Those are not numbers Republican candidates want to see heading into election season. 

Trump could have used the court’s decision as an excuse to pause tariffs until after the election in the hope of giving Republicans a better chance of retaining the House of Representatives. By doubling down, he may keep his tariffs but lose the House.

Merrill Matthews is the Texas state chair of Our Republican Legacy.  

Copyright 2026 Nexstar Media Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

More Opinions - Supreme Court News

Gorsuch takes aim at fellow Supreme Court justices in tariff decision

Hegseth says he’ll order random pizzas to throw off monitoring app

France bars US ambassador Kushner from meeting government officials  

White House plays hardball with Democrats over DHS shutdown

Democratic leaders scrambling to prevent repeat of last year’s rowdy State of ...

GOP set for internal battle over Supreme Court tariff ruling

Trump puts Iran’s leader in double bind: Capitulation or risk of war

Democrats prepare to protest Trump State of the Union: What to know

Senate Democrat: Trump has ‘no intention of following’ Constitution on ...

GOP members call on Tony Gonzales to resign over alleged affair

Republicans eye opening for DHS deal this week as Democrats double down

Here’s how Trump’s polling has changed since last year

State Department receives hundreds of calls on 24/7 crisis hotline for US ...

Senate Democrats unveil Trump tariffs refund legislation

US women’s gold medal-winning hockey team declines Trump State of the Union ...

US imposes 10 percent tariff after Trump promises 15 percent rate

Texas GOP Senate candidate: ‘It’s time for the next generation of American ...

Trump administration ending collections on tariffs deemed illegal

The Hill Podcasts – Morning Report

2024 Election Results

2024 Election Forecast

Regulation - Administration

Energy & Environment Video Clips

Health Care Video Clips

Technology Video Clips

Transportation Video Clips

International Video Clips

Cybersecurity Video Clips

National Security Video Clips

Contributors to The Hill

Submit Opinion Content

PRIVACY POLICY 09/30/2025

Advertise with Nexstar

Journalistic Integrity

THE HILL 400 N CAPITOL STREET NW, SUITE 650 WASHINGTON DC 20002

© 1998 - 2026 Nexstar Media Inc. | All Rights Reserved.

Provided by Nexstar Media Group, Inc.

Sign in to create a free account. No password needed.

By clicking on any of the sign up options below, you confirm that you have read and agree to our Terms of Use, which includes a jury trial waiver and class action waiver, and that you have read our Privacy Policy detailing our collection, use and sharing of your personal information.

By clicking on any of the sign up options below, you confirm that you have read and agree to our Terms of Use, which includes a jury trial waiver and class action waiver, and that you have read our Privacy Policy detailing our collection, use and sharing of your personal information.

The Hill is provided by Nexstar Media Group, Inc., and uses the My Nexstar sign-in, which works across our media network.

Learn more at nexstar.tv/privacy-policy.

The Hill is provided by Nexstar Media Group, Inc., and uses the My Nexstar sign-in, which works across our media network.

Nexstar Media Group, Inc. is a leading, diversified media company that produces and distributes engaging local and national news, sports, and entertainment content across its television and digital platforms. The My Nexstar sign-in works across the Nexstar network—including The CW, NewsNation, The Hill, and more. Learn more at nexstar.tv/privacy-policy.

Provided by Nexstar Media Group, Inc.

Check your email inbox

Provided by Nexstar Media Group, Inc.

Thanks for registering!

Provided by Nexstar Media Group, Inc.

Are you sure you want to log out?

© The Hill