In a trio of cases, two currently pending before the Supreme Court and one that is likely to land on the justices’ doorstep as soon as Tuesday, President Donald Trump claims new powers that, if he prevails, would give him near-total control over all US fiscal and monetary policy.

The first is the ongoing litigation over Trump’s tariffs. The Court plans to hear two challenges to the tariffs, known as Trump v. V.O.S. Selections and Learning Resources v. Trump, in November.

At least 10 federal judges have concluded that Trump exceeded his authority when he imposed many of the ever-shifting import taxes that have defined his second term in office. And the amount of money at stake here is massive — Trump’s lawyers estimate that the tariffs “will reduce federal deficits by $4 trillion in the coming years.” Yale’s Budget Lab estimates that they will raise $2.4 trillion if they remain in effect for 2026-35.

Trump, in other words, claims the power to levy trillions of dollars worth of new taxes without seeking new legislation from Congress.

The second case is Department of State v. AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition, which is currently pending on the Court’s “shadow docket,” a mix of emergency motions and other matters that the Court often decides without explanation. AIDS Vaccine involves “impoundment,” a president’s refusal to spend money that he is required to spend under a federal appropriations law.

Until very recently, there was widespread consensus that impoundment is illegal. In a 1969 Justice Department memo, future Chief Justice William Rehnquist wrote that “it is in our view extremely difficult to formulate a constitutional theory to justify a refusal by the President to comply with a congressional directive to spend.” And even some members of the current Court’s Republican majority have expressed skepticism about impoundment in the past.

Yet, in an ominous sign that this Court may allow Trump to impound funds anyway, Chief Justice John Roberts issued a brief order last week permitting Trump to temporarily impound foreign aid funds while the Court considers the AIDS Vaccine case.

The final case is Trump v. Cook, which is likely to reach the Supreme Court as soon as Tuesday. Cook involves Trump’s attempt to fire a member of the Federal Reserve’s Board of Governors, in violation of a federal statute which only allows Fed governors to be fired “for cause.” Late on Monday, a federal appeals court

© Vox