President Trump's tariff policy is about to get a lot more complicated after this month's ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court nullified most of his unilaterally imposed tariffs.
Earlier this month the court ruled that Trump had overstepped his authority in issuing many of his tariffs. The court ruling specifically focused on the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) which Trump used to issue many of his tariffs.
Essentially Trump broadly used the "emergency powers" of the act to implement tariffs against countries for a variety of reasons. For example, tariffs against Canada, Mexico, and China were implemented because drug smuggling had "created a public health crisis."
Trump also used the act to issue "reciprocal" tariffs based on trade imbalances and a baseline tariff on all countries of 10 percent. Trump cited the IEEPA because, under the constitution, only Congress can issue tariffs.
In ruling against Trump, the Supreme Court wrote that the president had not identified "clear congressional authorization" to issue tariffs. It noted that the IEEPA "contains no reference to tariffs or duties."
Despite the ruling, Trump has said that he will issue new tariffs, and will use other existing laws as justification, Yahoo Finance reported. The website noted that some Trump tariffs, which were issued under laws that pertain to regulating products related to national security, were unaffected by the court ruling.
In other words, Trump is going to look for ways to interpret existing laws to reimplement tariffs which will, likely, lead to more court cases.
On February 20, Trump announced a 10 percent tariff on good coming to the U.S. and cited section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 as justification. This time, however, Trump set a period of 150 days for the tariff.
Under the U.S. Constitution, the power to impose tariffs lie with Congress, something Republican Senator Rand Paul noted in the aftermath of the Supreme Court's ruling.
"Tariffs are taxes, and the power to declare them belongs to Congress. That truth goes beyond this case. No future administration, including a socialist one, can use 'emergency' powers to get around Congress and tax by decree," Paul wrote on X.
Regardless, Trump is pressing forward, but Yahoo! Finance noted that the attempt by Trump to recreate his tariff landscape will not be easy. For example, the administration cited section 122 of the of the Trade Act of 1974 as justification for its new tariffs. That is a section of the law that has never been used before, according to Yahoo! Finance.
The administration also cites section 302 of the act, however, Ed Brzytwa, vice-president of international trade at the Consumer Technology Association, told Yahoo! Finance that that section "has a lot more processes and guardrails around it, there is more transparency built into the statute, and there are opportunities for stakeholders to comment, to give testimony at public hearings."
Meanwhile, the administration is being sued for refunds from the illegal tariffs it already issued. FedEx, for example, already filed a lawsuit seeking a "full refund." In total, the Trump administration could be on the hook for $130 billion in refunds, the BBC reported.
Although the government faces liability from companies that paid the tariff cost, one study found that it was regular consumers who footed most of the cost of the tariffs.
The Federal Reserve Bank of New York found that 90 percent of the cost of Trump's tariffs was being passed along to consumers.
"Over the course of 2025, the average tariff rate on U.S. imports increased from 2.6 to 13 percent," the NY FED stated. "Using import data through November 2025...We find that nearly 90 percent of the tariffs' economic burden fell on U.S. firms and consumers."
