Trump's Tariffs Deemed Illegal - What Now?

You can see that the case is Learning Resources versus Trump, President of the United States.

Learning Resources is actually an Illinois-based, uh, toy company that brought this case against the White House, albeit the case was actually combined with another similar case brought by the liquor company, the US Selections, and 12 US states, which is why you can see multiple plaintiffs here.

And in the case, the plaintiffs alleged, and the Supreme Court justices upheld, that IEEPA does not authorize the president to impose tariffs.

IEEPA is a 1977 law that, among other things, allows the president a number of powers to restrict transactions and trade in the presence of a, quote, "unusual and extraordinary threat," essentially providing a way for the president to bypass congressional approval in the face of a threat to national security.

However, the justices ruled six to three, with three conservative justices dissenting, that while the president has the power to block imports and exports under this law, the power to explicitly tax is not covered by these powers and rests solely with Congress as outlined in the Constitution, something that was supported by precedent, with no president having ever previously imposed tariffs under IEEPA.

And the justices argued that Trump's tariffs violated the Major Questions doctrine, uh, which requires that actions by the government's executive branch of significant consequence be clearly authorized by Congress rather than through ambiguous language.

In other words, because IEEPA doesn't explicitly give Trump the power to tariff countries, and because Trump has been meaningfully leaning on this law, handing out tariffs like Oprah Winfrey with how he's been making sure everyone gets one, these actions should require congressional approval, with the justices indicating, quote, "The president must point to clear congressional authorization to justify his extraordinary assertion of that power.

He cannot." Now, as for which tariffs are impacted here, the justices highlighted two main sets of levies, the first being the fentanyl-linked tariffs Trump first announced early in his term against China, Mexico and Canada, specifically the 10% tariff on Chinese goods, 25% tariff for Mexican goods, and the heightened 35% tariff on Canadian goods.

And the second set are the more broadly reaching country-specific reciprocal tariffs, uh, that Trump first announced on April 2nd, or the so-called Liberation Day, with this being inclusive of the many updated tariffs that came afterwards, meaning that any of the countries that saw their names appear on those bristol board posters and-