Supreme Court Strikes Down President Trump’s Tariff Trade Strategy

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Friday that imposing duties without Congressional authorization exceeds presidential powers. RealAg Radio host Shaun Haney joins us to discuss the potential trade and agriculture implications of the recent ruling.

SCOTUS-Building_GaryBlakeleyAdobeStock_27844626_1920x1080

Supreme Court Building in Washington, D.C.

Photo by Gary Blakeley

WASHINGTON, D.C. (RFD NEWS) — The Supreme Court handed down a major ruling on President Donald Trump’s tariff trade strategy. Several opinions are expected from the Court this morning.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that the Trump Administration’s controversial trade strategy to impose global duties without Congressional approval exceeded the limits of presidential power. Details of the decision and how the tariffs will be rolled back are still be released.

“Article I, Section 8, of the Constitution sets forth the powers of the Legislative Branch. The first Clause of that provision specifies that “The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises.” It is no accident that this power appears first. The power to tax was, Alexander Hamilton explained, “the most important of the authorities proposed to be conferred upon the Union.” The Federalist No. 33, pp. 202–203 (C. Rossiter ed. 1961). It is both a “power to destroy,” McCulloch v. Maryland, 4 Wheat. 316, 431 (1819), and a power “necessary to the existence and prosperity of a nation”—“the one great power upon which the whole national fabric is based.” Nicol v. Ames, 173 U. S. 509, 515 (1899).

The power to impose tariffs is “very clear[ly] . . . a branch of the taxing power.” Gibbons v. Ogden, 9 Wheat. 1, 201 (1824). “A tariff,” after all, “is a tax levied on imported goods and services.”

U.S. Supreme Court

Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA), a senior member of the Senate Finance Committee and chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, today issued the following statement regarding the Supreme Court’s decision on tariffs:
“While Congress gave some of its authority on importations to the president when it passed the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), the Supreme Court has determined that Congress did not authorize President Trump’s use of tariffs. I’m one of the only sitting members of Congress who was in office during IEEPA’s passage. Since then, I’ve made clear Congress needs to reassert its constitutional role over commerce, which is why I introduced prospective legislation that would give Congress a say when tariffs are levied in the future. President Trump is a very skilled negotiator, and I want him to continue to be successful in expanding market access. He’s already succeeded in deals, including getting American beef into Australia, ethanol and beef into England, rice into Japan and pork into Taiwan. I appreciate the work he and his administration are doing to restore fair, reciprocal trade agreements. I urge the Trump administration to keep negotiating, while also working with Congress to secure longer-term enforcement measures so we can provide expanded market opportunities and certainty for Iowa’s family farmers and businesses.”
Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA)

A recent ruling is raising new questions about what it could mean for agricultural trade moving forward, particularly for Canadian producers and cross-border relationships.

RealAg Radio host Shaun Haney joined us on Friday’s Market Day Report just after the news broke to share his perspective on how the ruling could impact Canadian agriculture and trade.

In his interview with RFD NEWS, Haney discussed the potential implications for Canadian producers and whether the decision could influence future trade negotiations or ongoing trade discussions between key partners. He also weighed in on whether the ruling could shape the broader tone of upcoming trade agreements or disputes affecting agriculture.

What’s Next for Tariffs from a Legal Standpoint?

The U.S. Supreme Court has struck down tariffs imposed under emergency powers by former President Trump, ruling 6-3 that the president lacks the authority to levy duties without congressional approval. The decision has prompted widespread speculation about the next steps and the potential impact on American agriculture.

Roger McEowen with the Washburn School of Law joined us on Friday’s Market Day Report to break down the ruling. McEowen explained the legal reasoning behind the decision and how it affects tariffs previously imposed on trading partners. He also discussed potential implications for the agriculture sector, including how U.S. farmers and exporters might navigate shifts in trade dynamics.

McEowen outlined the next steps in the legal and legislative process and weighed in on whether the ruling could influence upcoming trade negotiations or ongoing disputes.

In a post on Truth Social, President Trump warned overturning the tariffs would create what he called a “complete mess,” potentially disrupting ongoing trade deals. Treasury officials say contingency plans are already in place if the Court strikes the duties. At the same time, a Financial Times report says the administration is considering rolling back some steel and aluminum tariffs amid growing political pressure.

Trump scheduled a press conference at 1:30 PM ET to share his reaction to the Supreme Court’s decision.

Stay with RFD NEWS on Market Day Report, Rural Evening News, and our social channels for updates on this developing story critical to agriculture.

Follow us on social media
Related Stories
While the U.S.-China framework for soybean trade is in place, Ohio farmer Chris Gibbs tells us he will believe it when he sees it.
The Court may limit emergency tariff powers, complicating a key bargaining tool; ag could see shifts in input costs and export dynamics as China, Brazil, and India talks evolve.
U.S. sugar producers and processors should brace for price pressure and challenging export logistics with global sugar supply ramping up — driven by Brazil, India, and Thailand — especially at the raw processing level.
Host of RealAg Radio Shaun Haney discusses how the proposed reductions to agriculture programs in Canada’s new budget could affect research and support programs that farmers need.
The Farm Bureau urges trade enforcement, biofuel growth, fair input pricing, and pro-farmer policy reforms to restore long-term certainty.
A SCOTUS ruling on Trump’s tariffs could have long-term implications on the authority of future administrations to control U.S. trade policy, according to RFD-TV legal expert Roger McEowen.

Marion is a digital content manager for RFD News and FarmHER + RanchHER. She started working for Rural Media Group in May 2022, bringing a decade of digital experience in broadcast media and some cooking experience to the team.

LATEST STORIES BY THIS AUTHOR:

The report shows that, despite production challenges, dairy farmers are producing more milk with fewer resources per gallon across the industry.
Canada’s new voluntary Grocery Sector Code of Conduct will take effect on Jan. 1, a goodwill effort to promote fairness and transparency between retailers and support farms that sell directly to stores.
With record grain harvests and rising global ethanol demand, leaders across the ag and energy sectors are pushing for year-round E15 sales to mitigate the strain on grain trade.
Concerns over Chronic Wasting Disease are fueling a long-standing legal battle between Minnesota regulators and deer farmers. The case could soon reach the state’s Supreme Court with broader implications for agriculture.
The National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA) and Public Lands Council (PLC) are praising the passage of a bill to delist gray wolves as an endangered species by the U.S. House last week.
USDA Undersecretary Luke Lindberg told RFD-TV News that we can only guess what Congress will do down the road. Still, the USDA recognizes its responsibility to spend resources efficiently and effectively.