Supreme Court Strikes Down Trump’s IEEPA Tariffs in Fractured 6–3 Ruling

The split decision limits emergency tariff authority under IEEPA, steering the White House toward slower and narrower trade laws.

Overview

Six justices rejected IEEPA as a source of sweeping tariff power, with three liberals relying on ordinary statutory interpretation and three conservatives invoking the major questions doctrine.
Three conservative justices dissented, arguing the statute’s phrase "regulate … importation" encompassed tariff authority and that the major questions doctrine should not govern foreign trade.
President Trump condemned the decision, attacking the liberal justices and criticizing conservative justices who voted against the tariffs.
The administration is weighing other tariff pathways such as Sections 232, 201, 301, 122, and 338, which require investigations, hearings, consultations, or impose rate and duration limits.
Legal analysts highlighted disputes over the major questions doctrine and historical understanding, including debate about the Yoshida precedent and the role of commerce versus taxation powers.