President Donald Trump vowed to implement a modern 10% global tariff within three days, hours after the Supreme Court struck down his previous attempt to impose broad tariffs using emergency powers. The 6-3 ruling, delivered Friday, found that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) did not authorize the president to levy tariffs as a form of taxation without congressional approval.
Speaking at a press conference following the decision, Trump denounced the court as a “disgrace” and accused the justices of being “swayed by foreign interests.” He specifically criticized liberal justices as a “disgrace to our nation” and conservative justices who joined the majority as “unpatriotic and disloyal” to the Constitution. Despite the setback, Trump asserted his authority to impose tariffs, stating, “I have the right to do tariffs, and I’ve always had the right to do tariffs.”
The administration plans to invoke the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 as the legal basis for the new tariffs, which will be applied “straight across the board.” Trump indicated that the initial 10% tariff would be followed by investigations into unfair trade practices, potentially leading to further levies. “We’re going straight ahead with 10 percent, straight across the board, which was the absolute right to do,” he said. “That’s a lot of money coming into our country.”
The Supreme Court’s decision represents a significant victory for businesses and U.S. States that had challenged the original tariffs, potentially opening the door to billions of dollars in refunds. However, Trump signaled his intention to contest any refund claims, predicting years of legal battles. The ruling effectively lowers the average U.S. Trade-weighted tariff rate to 8.3% from 12.7%, according to estimates by Oxford Economics.
The original tariffs, initially targeting Mexico, Canada, and China, were later expanded to include dozens of trade partners under what the administration termed “Liberation Day” last April. The White House had argued that IEEPA granted the president the power to regulate trade in response to national emergencies, citing issues such as illegal drugs and trade deficits. The court rejected this interpretation, emphasizing that Congress holds the constitutional authority over taxation.
Experts caution that implementing tariffs under the Trade Expansion Act will be more challenging than using IEEPA. Rachel Ziemba, a senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security, noted that the administration’s ability to quickly announce and implement tariffs has been diminished. Kimberly Clausing, a researcher at the Peterson Institute of International Economics, agreed, stating that the “strength of the president’s tariff cudgel is diminished” and that businesses can expect “somewhat less mercurial US tariff processes.”
The duties are expected to be layered on top of existing sectoral tariffs on steel, aluminum, and auto parts. Oxford Economics had previously estimated that Trump’s original tariffs would generate nearly $3.6 trillion in revenue between 2026 and 2035. Trump claimed that his powers under the Trade Expansion Act could ultimately result in even higher revenue, stating, “In order to protect our country, a president can actually charge more tariffs than I was charging in the past period of a year.”
The administration has previously used tariffs not only to raise revenue and encourage domestic manufacturing but also to exert pressure on countries regarding U.S. Foreign policy. For example, India faced a 25% tariff for purchasing oil from Russia. With IEEPA no longer available, the administration may increasingly rely on other economic penalties, such as sanctions, and potentially even military action, to achieve its objectives.
