Hot Posts

6/recent/ticker-posts

Trump announces 10% universal tariff following Supreme Court decision


President Donald Trump announced Friday that his administration will move forward with new tariff actions after a major ruling from the Supreme Court of the United States struck down a key legal basis for several of his existing import taxes. 

Speaking during a press conference at the White House, Trump said he would impose a universal tariff of 10 percent on imports and launch investigations that could lead to additional trade penalties on a broad range of countries and goods. The announcement came just hours after the court invalidated tariffs the administration had imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA).

“In order to protect our country, a president can actually charge more tariffs than I was charging in the past period of a year under the various tariffs authorities,” Trump told reporters Friday.

“So we can use other of the statutes, other of the tariff authorities, which have also been confirmed and are fully allowed,” he added.

Court Limits Emergency Powers

In a 6-3 decision issued Friday morning, the high court ruled that while IEEPA gives the president authority to regulate international commerce during national emergencies, it does not authorize the imposition of tariffs.

The administration had relied on IEEPA to justify tariffs on imports from Canada, Mexico, and China, arguing that the countries were not doing enough to prevent fentanyl trafficking into the United States. Trump also expanded those tariffs in April to cover dozens of nations before scaling them back amid financial market volatility.

The court held that although the statute allows a president to halt or restrict trade in response to national security threats, it does not extend to imposing import taxes.

The decision represents a significant constraint on one of the legal tools Trump used to advance his trade agenda. However, the ruling does not eliminate the president’s ability to impose tariffs through other statutory authorities.

“This is ridiculous, but it’s OK, because we have other ways, numerous ways,” Trump said Friday in response to the ruling.

New Tariff Strategy

Trump outlined a multi-pronged strategy to continue pursuing trade restrictions using alternative legal frameworks.

First, he said he will implement a universal 10 percent tariff under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974. That provision permits the president to impose tariffs of up to 15 percent for a limited period to address trade imbalances.

Second, the administration will maintain existing tariffs on foreign steel, aluminum, and other imports enacted under Section 232 of the same law. Those tariffs are justified on national security grounds and were not affected by the Supreme Court’s decision.

Third, Trump said the administration will begin the process of pursuing new tariffs under Section 301, which allows the United States to impose duties on imports tied to unfair trade practices.

Trump relied heavily on Sections 232 and 301 during his first term in office. Both provisions allow the executive branch to conduct investigations—typically through the Commerce Department or the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative—to determine whether imports threaten national security or result from unfair trade behavior.

Policy Implications

The court’s ruling narrows the scope of presidential authority under emergency economic powers but leaves intact other pathways for trade action. Trump’s announcement suggests his administration intends to continue using those alternative tools to shape trade policy.

The universal tariff proposal, in particular, could have wide-ranging implications for global trade flows and domestic markets if implemented. Investigations under Sections 232 and 301 could also lead to additional targeted tariffs on specific industries or trading partners in the months ahead.

For now, the administration’s next steps will depend on how quickly it moves through the investigation processes required under existing trade laws. The developments mark a new phase in the ongoing balance between executive authority and judicial oversight in U.S. trade policy.