Supreme Court Appears Skeptical of Trump Tariffs

By Ryan Hanrahan

The Wall Street Journal’s Jess Bravin and Gavin Bade reported that “President Trump’s global tariffs ran headlong into a skeptical Supreme Court on Wednesday, with justices across the spectrum expressing doubt that a 1970s emergency-powers law could be read to provide the president unilateral authority to remake the international economy and collect billions of dollars in import taxes without explicit congressional approval.”

“But even if the court strikes down the tariffs Trump initiated on his self-declared Liberation Day last April, the justices gave little indication how they might unwind the president’s signature economic policy and favorite diplomatic tool,” Bravin and Bade reported. “That left unclear whether previously paid duties would be refunded or whether Congress could be invited to step in, perhaps by ratifying the levies retroactively. ‘It seems to me like it could be a mess,’ Justice Amy Coney Barrett said during the later stages of an oral argument that ran nearly three hours.”

“Solicitor General John Sauer took heat from all sides as he pressed the administration’s argument: that the president’s power to regulate foreign financial transactions when he declares an emergency includes the authority to impose tariffs,” Bravin and Bade reported. “Tariffs were taxes, a majority of justices agreed, and many were dubious that Congress would so casually surrender to the executive its core constitutional power to raise revenue.”

“The Supreme Court, cognizant of the economic stakes and the need for swift legal clarity, had put the Trump administration’s appeal on the fast track after three lower courts struck down the tariffs as exceeding the powers assigned to the president through the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977,” Bravin and Bade reported. “The statute, known as Ieepa, allows the president to regulate financial dealings with foreign entities after declaring an emergency, but doesn’t mention tariffs, duties or imports.”

The Wall Street Journal’s Lydia Wheeler reported that “typically, it takes three to six months for the justices to decide a case after it is argued. Expect the tariff ruling to come much sooner. The justices agreed to fast-track proceedings in this case, and court watchers believe a decision could come before the end of the year.”

Farm Groups Largely Stay Out of Proceedings

Capital Press’ Don Jenkins reported that “the U.S. Supreme Court has been deluged with briefs on the legality of President Trump’s reciprocal and fentanyl-related tariffs, but not from farm groups.”

“U.S. farm groups haven’t submitted briefs on their own or with others. Farm groups such as the American Farm Bureau and American Soybean Association have cautioned against tariffs. But they’ve also praised trade deals the Trump administration attributes to the threat of tariffs,” Jenkins reported. “Trade deals with China, Japan, South Korea, the European Union and the United Kingdom will unwind if the Supreme Court strikes down the tariffs, according to the Justice Department.”

“Trump advised farmers to buy more land and bigger tractors after China agreed to resume agricultural trade. He said in a Truth Social post Nov. 2 that the tariff case is one of the most important in U.S. history,” Jenkins reported. “The U.S. will be at a disadvantage if a president can’t quickly and nimbly use the power of tariffs, he said. ‘Our recent successful negotiation with China, and many others, put us in a strong position only because we had tariffs with which to negotiate fair and sustainable deals,’ he said.”

White House Preparing for Plan B if Needed

Politico’s Megan Messerly reported that “the mood inside the Trump administration following the arguments Wednesday is ‘grim,’ according to two people close to the White House, granted anonymity to share details of private conversations. The court hearing comes at a difficult time for the administration, which is reeling from the GOP’s electoral defeat that the president tied to a record-breaking shutdown while his allies fault him for not talking more about economic concerns.”

“If the justices uphold his use of the emergency law, Trump will almost certainly take it as a green light to keep using tariffs as a multipurpose weapon,” Messerly reported. “But if the court clips Trump’s authority, White House aides expect a scramble to rebuild his tariff regime under narrower laws that don’t offer the same level of reach or speed that the 1977 law does.”

“Even loyalists acknowledge those fallback options would slow Trump, with many of them requiring months-long investigations to be completed before the president can impose tariffs,” Messerly reported. “White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt alluded to the administration’s backup plan during a Tuesday briefing, saying that aides ‘are always preparing for a Plan B’ even as they ‘remain optimistic that the Supreme Court is going to do the right thing.’”

Supreme Court Appears Skeptical of Trump Tariffs was originally published by Farmdoc.