Press Enter to search
Washington: US President Trump has suffered a major setback at the US Supreme Court. The US Supreme Court has ruled that Trump lacks the legal authority to impose tariffs. The court declared that Trump's tariffs on countries around the world are illegal. The Supreme Court ruled that President Donald Trump exceeded his authority by imposing large tariffs using a law designed to declare a national emergency.
The court stated that the law "does not authorize the President to impose tariffs." In a 6-3 decision by Chief Justice John Roberts, the court upheld a lower court's ruling that Trump abused his authority by using the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose large-scale import taxes.
This law, enacted in 1977, allows the president to regulate commerce during a national emergency, but it does not explicitly mention tariffs.
According to reports, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in the decision that "the President must demonstrate clear congressional approval to justify his claim to exclusive power to impose tariffs." The court further stated, "He cannot do that."
The US Supreme Court held that the President cited wartime emergency powers to justify the tariffs. However, the court stated that wartime powers do not justify the use of the IEEPA for tariffs. The President has no inherent authority to impose tariffs during peacetime.
This US Supreme Court decision, reached by a 6 to 3 majority, concerns tariffs imposed under the Emergency Powers Act, which Trump used to impose large "reciprocal" tariffs on nearly every other country.
This is the first major part of Trump's broader agenda to come directly before the nation's highest court.
A majority of justices stated in their decision that the Constitution "very clearly" grants Congress the power to impose taxes, including tariffs. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote, "The framers of the Constitution did not delegate any portion of the taxing power to the executive branch."
Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas, and Brett Kavanaugh dissented. Kavanaugh wrote in his dissent, "The tariffs being discussed here may or may not be sensible policy. But they are clearly legal, based on text, history, and precedent."
The tariff decision does not prevent Trump from imposing duties under other laws. While these impose greater limitations on the speed and severity of Trump's actions, top administration officials have said they expect to maintain the tariff framework under other authorities.
This Supreme Court decision will have a major impact on US-India trade relations. Trump's aggressive trade policy had strained New Delhi-Washington relations. India was among the first countries affected by Trump's "reciprocal" tariffs announced on April 2. Trump called the day "Liberation Day."
Trump repeatedly criticized India's tariff structure, calling its economy a "dead economy." Trump targeted duties on India's agricultural economy, medical devices, and motorcycles, accusing New Delhi of maintaining unfair trade barriers.
American think tanks have repeatedly stated that India is funding the Ukraine war because it buys crude oil from Russia. Citing this, Trump imposed a 25 percent "reciprocal" tariff and a 25 percent punitive tariff on India for importing crude oil from Russia.
However, after India recently signed a trade deal with the US, Trump reduced the tariff rate on India to 18 percent. The US Supreme Court's decision has been praised by Congress. Congress leader Jairam Ramesh wrote on Instagram, "Hats off to the US Supreme Court for striking down President Trump's entire tariff strategy! This is a remarkable decision, given its thoughtful approach. The 6-3 decision is significant. The American system of checks and balances appears to still be working."
This decision has undermined a key part of Trump's second-term economic agenda. This decision by the US Supreme Court could have global implications. In his second term, Trump pursued an aggressive foreign and trade policy and used tariffs as a weapon. This policy changed the course of the global trade war. Using this law, Trump imposed heavy tariffs on many countries around the world, including India, China, and Mexico. Through these tariffs, Trump collected billions of dollars from countries around the world.
Following this decision, the United States may have to refund billions of dollars to its importers who paid the IEEPA tariffs, even though some importers have already passed these costs on to consumers.
The US government argued in favor of the tariffs, saying that the IEEPA tariffs have helped facilitate trade deals worth trillions of dollars. This has led to trade deals with foreign countries ranging from China to the United Kingdom and Japan. The government stated that the court's decision
Republican President Trump has been vocal on the issue. He described it as one of the most important cases in US history and said that a decision against the tariffs would be an economic blow to the country. But the legal opposition crossed the political spectrum, including from libertarians and pro-business groups typically aligned with the GOP. Polling has found that tariffs are not very popular with the general public, as voters face inflation as a result.
The Constitution gives Congress the power to impose tariffs. But the Trump administration argued that a 1977 law that allows the president to regulate imports during an emergency also allows him to set tariffs. Other presidents have invoked this law dozens of times, often to impose bans, but Trump was the first to use it for an import tax.
Trump imposed "reciprocal" tariffs on most countries in April 2025 to reduce the US trade deficit, which he declared a national emergency. Trump used this law to impose a 25 percent tariff, while an additional 25 percent tariff was imposed on India for importing crude oil from Russia. However, following the India-US trade deal, Trump has increased the tariff rate on India to 18 percent.