President Trump loves to take unilateral action, but the Supreme Court has delivered a stark message about clear limits to how far he can go without getting Congress on board.
In their decision Friday striking down his major tariffs, the justices ruled that Congress never granted the president the expansive powers he claimed under a 1977 law.
The 170-page ruling erased a year of Mr. Trump’s work and sparked public grousing from the president, who said some of his own nominees to the high court had betrayed him.
Mr. Trump had cited the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, which gives presidents the power to “regulate” imports. He said the language meant he could impose tariffs unilaterally.
Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., writing the key opinion in the 6-3 ruling, said the president was wrong.
“We claim no special competence in matters of economics or foreign affairs. We claim only, as we must, the limited role assigned to us by Article III of the Constitution. Fulfilling that role, we hold that IEEPA does not authorize the president to impose tariffs,” wrote Chief Justice Roberts, a George W. Bush appointee.
He said the Constitution grants Congress the power to impose duties, or tariffs. Congress can lend those powers to a president, he said, but must do so explicitly.
His reasoning was largely joined by the court’s three Democratic appointees and was joined in full by Justices Amy Coney Barrett and Neil M. Gorsuch, both Trump appointees.
“I’m ashamed of certain members of the court, absolutely ashamed for not having the courage to do what’s right for our country,” Mr. Trump told reporters at the White House.
Justice Gorsuch, in a concurring opinion, offered what appeared to be his own message to Mr. Trump and others “who think it important for the nation to impose more tariffs”: Take it up with Congress.
“Yes, legislating can be hard and take time. And, yes, it can be tempting to bypass Congress when some pressing problem arises. But the deliberative nature of the legislative process was the whole point of its design,” he said.
Chief Justice Roberts said the law may have had some ambiguity, so he invoked the major questions doctrine. Under that judicial stricture, the law must be clear in areas where the president claims Congress has turned over powers.
SEE ALSO: Trump un-endorses Rep. Jeff Hurd over opposition to tariffs, backs GOP primary challenger
Justice Gorsuch cautioned the ruling’s critics to think long term. He said they may end up hailing the court the next time it uses the major questions doctrine to block a president.
Indeed, it was the major questions doctrine that caused the justices to sink President Biden’s $400 billion student loan forgiveness plan.
Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh, another Trump appointee, led the dissent. He said the court has never subjected a president’s foreign policy powers to the major questions doctrine.
Besides, he said, it was clear enough to him that the law’s language about regulating imports did cover tariffs.
“The tariffs at issue here may or may not be wise policy. But as a matter of text, history, and precedent, they are clearly lawful,” Justice Kavanaugh wrote.
Mr. Trump’s aggressive agenda has generally bypassed Congress. Save for an early immigration bill and the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, the president’s first-year accomplishments stemmed from his own executive actions.
The ruling Friday was a rare setback from a high court that has, by and large, given Mr. Trump a lot of leeway. It has allowed him to sideline some spending that Congress had approved and granted him expansive powers to carry out deportations and end lenient immigration programs.
Still to come are big decisions on his power to fire a member of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors and his attempt to block federal recognition of birthright citizenship for children born to parents who are illegal immigrants or temporary legal visitors.
Justice Kavanaugh said in his dissent that even the court’s latest ruling doesn’t damage Mr. Trump much. The president still can cobble together a package of tariffs using other sections of law beyond the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, the associate justice said.
Hours later, that was just what Mr. Trump did. He cited the Trade Act of 1974 to impose a global 10% tariff, effective Tuesday and lasting 150 days. On Saturday, he raised the tariff to 15%.
Trump officials said Sunday that the new tariffs largely replicate the now-stricken levies and will generate the same revenue.
They said they don’t expect to go to Congress for approval, noting that the other sections of the law are well-trod territory.
“We’re happy to talk to them about it, but we’re not going to stop our program. We’ll just use the congressional authorities they’ve extended already for now,” U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said on CBS’s “Face the Nation.”
Democrats accused Mr. Trump of trying to “defy” the will of the Supreme Court.
Ironically, it was Republicans who leveled that same charge against Mr. Biden after he tried to find workarounds to the Supreme Court’s student loan ruling in 2023.
Mr. Trump will see some of the justices Tuesday when he delivers his State of the Union address at the U.S. Capitol.
The president was harsh in his criticism Friday.
“It’s my opinion that the court has been swayed by foreign interests and a political movement that is far smaller than people would ever think,” he said.
• Lindsey McPherson contributed to this report.
• Stephen Dinan can be reached at sdinan@washingtontimes.com.
• Alex Swoyer can be reached at aswoyer@washingtontimes.com.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.