WIREDGOV

EXPERT COMMENT

As the legal challenge to Trump’s tariffs reaches the US Supreme Court, the outcome could have far-reaching consequences for global trade and beyond.

This week, a case challenging the legality of US President Donald Trump’s trade tariffs reaches the US Supreme Court. The court’s ruling could have significant consequences for presidential power and global trade – although the US policy approach is unlikely to change.

The case concerns tariffs levied under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), which empowers the president to declare a national emergency over an ‘unusual and extraordinary’ foreign threat and respond with a range of actions, including sanctions and the freezing of funds. IEEPA has never before been used as a basis for tariffs nor does the statute explicitly authorize them, though President Richard Nixon relied on a similarly worded law to impose an emergency tariff on imports in 1971.

Under the US Constitution, taxation is Congress’s remit. The power to impose tariffs can be delegated to the executive under the right circumstances, including authority presidents have used across administrations to impose sectoral tariffs on national security grounds. Unlike his predecessors, however, Trump is also using IEEPA to impose tariffs, including levies on China, Mexico and Canada linked to fentanyl supply chains, ‘reciprocal tariffs’ on global trading partners in response to the US’s trade deficit, and recent measures targeting developments in Brazil and India.

The court’s ruling is expected in the months ahead. What consequences could either outcome have?

Click here to continue reading the full version of this Expert Comment on the Chatham House website.