In September, the Trump administration appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court to review its tariff policies, which were already rejected by lower courts
With three Trump-appointed justices sitting on the bench and a three-seat edge over the liberal wing of the court, the president likely thought this would be a big win for his administration, especially considering how important tariffs are to his overall economic agenda.
The reactions from justices during oral arguments this week, however, stunned everyone.
Trump has been wielding tariffs for leverage against many countries, and it is hard to argue with the results in terms of the president's success in getting major trade deals done.
Even so, his policies have been dealt loss after loss in the lower courts, so the administration appealed to the Supreme Court to review those rulings in the hopes that the court would overturn them.
An appellate court previously ruled, “The core Congressional power to impose taxes such as tariffs is vested exclusively in the legislative branch by the Constitution.”
The plaintiffs in the case have remained confident that they are on the right side of the issue, with their attorney stating, “These unlawful tariffs are inflicting serious harm on small businesses and jeopardizing their survival. We hope for a prompt resolution of this case for our clients.”
While no ruling has been rendered just yet, it is not looking good for Trump based on the lines of questioning from two of his appointed justices during Wednesday's oral arguments.
Justice Amy Coney Barrett seemed to be working in tandem with Justice Sonia Sotomayor, asking, "And so is it your contention that every country needed to be tariffed because of threats to the defense and industrial base? I mean, Spain? France?”
She continued, “I could see it with some countries, but explain to me why as many countries needed to be subject to the reciprocal tariff policy as are."
This was just a small portion of a very aggressive line of questioning from most of the conservative justices on the bench. But as noted, the liberal justices were firing away as well, with Sotomayor stating, "It's a congressional power, not a presidential power to tax. And you want to say tariffs are not taxes. But that's exactly what they are. They're generating money from American citizens, revenue."
Barrett was not the only Trump-appointed justice challenging the administration’s stance, as Justice Neil Gorsuch also seemed skeptical about giving the president carte blanche when it comes to tariffs.
He stated, “Congress can’t take that back without a supermajority.” Gorsuch then asked, “What president is going to give that power back? Could the president impose a 50 percent tariff on gas-powered cars and auto parts to deal with the unusual and extraordinary threat from abroad of climate change?”
Chief Justice John Roberts hit the administration along the same lines, stating, “If regulate importation means imposing tariffs on any product from any country, doesn’t that undermine the separation of powers? Congress has the power of the purse for a reason.”
The GOP is reeling right now after Tuesday's election losses, and it really cannot afford anything that will give the Democrats more ammunition in upcoming contests, but this does appear likely to be a loss for Trump. Based on the questions asked on Wednesday, I see this as a potential 7-2 ruling against the administration.
