The Supreme Court's Tariffs Ruling Puts Trump on Notice with a Bloody Nose
After a year of the US Supreme Court standing by as Donald Trump trampled on the constitutional separation of powers, the highest judicial panel has finally stepped in to set boundaries on the president's actions. The Supreme Court's ruling on Friday declared Trump's sweeping tariffs unlawful, effectively removing one of his key tools for exerting influence over foreign entities.
With midterm elections approaching, Trump has lost a significant weapon in his arsenal. Barb McQuade, a law professor at the University of Michigan, expressed relief, stating that the court has remembered the importance of Congress as a separate and co-equal branch of government. One of Trump's favorite levers of extortion has been taken away.
The ruling came as a shock to Trump, who wasted no time expressing his anger towards the justices who had defied him. He lashed out on social media, using all-caps personal attacks, which, even by his standards, were extraordinary. The three liberal-leaning justices who joined the majority were labeled 'fools' and 'lapdogs', while the six who voted against his tariffs were accused of being beholden to foreign countries. The three right-wing dissenters were praised for their 'strength, wisdom, and love of our Country'.
However, the truth is that the current Supreme Court has largely been accommodating to Trump's desires. Over the past year, the conservative justices, who hold a super-majority, have been issuing opinions in bits and pieces, raising concerns among constitutional jurists and democracy advocates. Before Trump returned to the White House, the court granted him the authoritarian's gift with the Trump v. US ruling, providing him with absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for official presidential acts.
During his first year back in office, the court issued 24 temporary rulings on its opaque 'shadow docket', collectively giving Trump the benefit of the doubt and overturning efforts by lower court judges to contain him. Several of these rulings allowed Trump to trample over powers reserved for Congress, such as restrictions on the president's power to fire agency heads.
Friday's tariff ruling marks a significant shift. The Learning Resources v. Trump decision dismisses Trump's invocation of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) as justification for his global tariffs. The ruling bluntly states that the legislation did not grant Trump the authority to impose tariffs, as tariffs are taxes, and the power of taxation is solely Congress's domain.
The Supreme Court's composition is now under scrutiny. John Roberts has re-emerged as a key figure, with the court's rightward drift and critical rulings like the anti-abortion Dobbs case leading some to question his leadership. Friday's ruling saw Roberts back in the driving seat, both as the author of the tariffs ruling and the architect of its 6-3 voting composition, a significant shift from the 6-3 America has become accustomed to.
The two other right-wing justices who joined Roberts in the majority are notably significant. Both Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett were appointed to the court by Trump, and their votes with the majority have inflamed Trump's response. Trump's public and personal attacks on these justices, including Barrett and Gorsuch, are unprecedented and vitriolic.
The ruling puts Trump on notice, but it also highlights the limits of the Supreme Court's beneficence. As Lisa Graves, an expert on the right-wing legal movement, noted, this ruling is not judicial courage; it's the Roberts court doing the bare minimum to rein in Trump's abuse of power.
The new 6-3 configuration suggests that some of Trump's other unconstitutional actions are also vulnerable, notably his attempt to destroy birthright citizenship as enshrined in the 14th Amendment. While Trump responded to the ruling as though he were impervious, announcing new tariffs under different legislative authority, the court has made its position clear: there are limits.
