Trump Says His Tariffs Are ‘Country-Saving’ in State of the Union
In last night’s State of the Union address, President Donald Trump reaffirmed his commitment to using tariffs as a negotiating tool, responding to the Supreme Court’s “unfortunate” 6–3 decision striking down his tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). The court’s opinion, delivered by Chief Justice John Roberts, holds that IEEPA “does not authorize the President to impose tariffs.”
Along with the chief justice, Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, Amy Coney Barrett, Ketanji Brown Jackson, and Neil Gorsuch rejected the Trump administration’s claim that IEEPA gives the president “broad, expansive power” to set tariff rates.
While Justices Samuel Alito, Brett Kavanaugh, and Clarence Thomas argue in dissent that the key phrase in IEEPA, “regulate importation,” has historically always included the power to impose tariffs, the concurring justices found it improbable for “two words separated by 16 others” to “bear such weight.” (RELATED: The Court Strikes, But the Tariffs March On)
The dissenting opinion, delivered by Justice Kavanaugh, holds, “[T]ariffs are a traditional and common tool to regulate importation.” Chiefly, the dissenters argue that if Congress wanted to restrict the president’s use of tariff powers under IEEPA, it would have done so explicitly rather than using “broad” language such as “regulate importation.” (RELATED: Tariffs at Work: Historic Gains Amid Media Skepticism)
One point of contention for both concurring and dissenting justices was the major questions doctrine, which the court uses to parse congressional delegation of authority. Under the doctrine, the executive branch’s exercise of an “extraordinary” delegation of congressional power must be supported by “clear statutory authority.”
While Chief Justice Roberts writes that there is “no exception” to the major questions doctrine for emergency statutes, Justices Kavanaugh, Thomas, and Alito declined to apply the doctrine to the question of tariff powers. For Justice Barrett, the doctrine is a question of “common sense,” not “substantive canon.”
Interestingly, even in concurrence, Justices Kagan, Sotomayor, and Jackson declined the application of the doctrine, choosing instead to rely on the “ordinary tools of statutory interpretation” to support their decision.
Uncowed by the lack of support from his colleagues, Justice Gorsuch’s concurring opinion contains an exhaustive defense of the major questions doctrine, in which he casts the principle as a necessary safeguard against “executive encroachment.”
In dissent on the major questions doctrine, Justice Kavanaugh advances two arguments. Firstly, he uses historical precedent to assert the president’s “clear congressional authorization” to impose tariffs. Namely, he cites Richard Nixon’s tariffs in 1971 and Gerald Ford’s tariffs issued a year before IEEPA’s passage in 1976.
Kavanaugh’s second argument is that applying the major questions doctrine in this case would place the judiciary’s thumb on the scale in a matter of foreign policy, an area that is the sole purview of the executive.
One could read the court’s prevailing opinion as a call for Congress to act; however, the president said in the State of the Union address that he does not need congressional approval, as prior statutes already afford him the authority to impose them.
That stands in contrast to House Speaker Mike Johnson’s (R-LA) statement on X, which said the “best path forward” would be determined by “Congress and the Administration.”
President Trump has wasted no time in invoking his legal tariff authority under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 to issue a 10 percent global tariff in response to the court’s ruling. He initially threatened the 10 percent tariff on Friday when the ruling came out, but subsequently raised it to 15 percent on Saturday.
As of yet, the White House has offered no rationale for the president’s change of mind. The 10 percent global tariff will be “over and above our normal tariffs” and could be a sign of what’s to come as the administration explores its available options, according to NBC News.
READ MORE from Tosin Akintola:
The Race to Fix America’s Healthcare System
Mamdani Attempts Sleight of Hand With Rental Ripoff Hearings