Special Episode: Trump's Tariffs Struck Down

What It Covers

The Supreme Court rules 6-3 in February that Trump's tariffs imposed under the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act are illegal, with NYT legal correspondent Adam Liptak analyzing the ruling's implications for presidential power and economic policy.

Key Questions Answered

• •Statutory language matters: The IEEPA ruling hinged on the absence of the word "tariffs" in the 1977 statute. Chief Justice Roberts concluded that "regulation of importation" — separated from relevant context by 16 other words — cannot legally authorize presidential tariff powers.
• •Conservative court fracture: The 6-3 split broke along unexpected lines: Roberts, Gorsuch, and Barrett joined the three liberal justices in the majority, while Thomas, Alito, and Kavanaugh dissented — signaling that Trump's judicial appointees are not uniformly deferential to his executive agenda.
• •Alternative tariff authority exists: Trump retains tariff power under Section 232 (national security) and Section 301 statutes, which explicitly name tariffs. These tools are narrower and more time-limited than IEEPA, functioning as a scalpel rather than the blunt instrument previously used.
• •Refund litigation incoming: Businesses that paid now-invalidated tariffs face an unresolved legal landscape. Some have already filed suits seeking reimbursement, but the majority opinion offers no guidance — and companies that passed costs to consumers may benefit twice if refunds are granted.