The decision of the U.S. Supreme Court, which canceled a significant portion of Donald Trump's tariffs, dealt a serious blow to his presidency.
In response to this ruling, Trump published a detailed statement on the Truth Social platform.
In his statement, Trump noted that the court's decision seems absurd. He pointed out that he is not allowed to collect even one dollar from other countries under the IEEPA, which he believes is more aimed at protecting other nations rather than the U.S. At the same time, he is allowed to completely restrict trade and impose embargoes on the same countries, which he finds ridiculous.
He emphasized that the court recognized his right to issue licenses but not to charge for them, which calls into question the validity of such an approach. According to him, the court granted him the authority to prohibit the import of various goods into the country, which is a much more powerful tool than many had thought. Trump added that, although the U.S. remains the "Hottest" country in the world, he intends to take a tougher stance in his actions.
Judge Kavanaugh, in his separate opinion, expressed disagreement with the ruling but added that it does not significantly limit the president's ability to impose tariffs in the future. He pointed to the existence of numerous federal laws that allow the president to impose tariffs, including the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 and the Trade Act of 1974.
Trump thanked Judge Kavanaugh and noted that, although the court's decision was likely not intentional, it actually strengthens the president's powers in trade and tariffs rather than limiting them. He also added that this ruling could lead to increased budget revenues and better protection for American companies.
According to him, the decision did not cancel the tariffs as such but merely recognized their application under the IEEPA as impermissible. The president's powers to block, impose embargoes, and license remain intact, and he can impose even higher tariffs than before, relying on other legally provided options.
Trump assured that all tariffs related to national security remain in effect and will continue to operate in full. He also announced the introduction of a 10% global tariff under Section 122, as well as the initiation of several investigations under Section 301 to protect the country from unfair trade practices.
He emphasized that the court recognized his right to issue licenses but not to charge for them, which calls into question the validity of such an approach. According to him, the court granted him the authority to prohibit the import of various goods into the country, which is a much more powerful tool than many had thought. Trump added that, although the U.S. remains the "Hottest" country in the world, he intends to take a tougher stance in his actions.
Judge Kavanaugh, in his separate opinion, expressed disagreement with the ruling but added that it does not significantly limit the president's ability to impose tariffs in the future. He pointed to the existence of numerous federal laws that allow the president to impose tariffs, including the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 and the Trade Act of 1974.
Trump thanked Judge Kavanaugh and noted that, although the court's decision was likely not intentional, it actually strengthens the president's powers in trade and tariffs rather than limiting them. He also added that this ruling could lead to increased budget revenues and better protection for American companies.
According to him, the decision did not cancel the tariffs as such but merely recognized their application under the IEEPA as impermissible. The president's powers to block, impose embargoes, and license remain intact, and he can impose even higher tariffs than before, relying on other legally provided options.
Trump assured that all tariffs related to national security remain in effect and will continue to operate in full. He also announced the introduction of a 10% global tariff under Section 122, as well as the initiation of several investigations under Section 301 to protect the country from unfair trade practices.
Earlier on Friday, the Supreme Court ruled that Donald Trump exceeded his authority in imposing large-scale tariffs under a law intended for cases of national emergency.
The judges, by a majority vote of 6 to 3, decided that Trump's tariff policy regarding goods imported into the U.S. does not comply with the 1977 law—the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA).
It should be noted that this ruling does not affect all of Trump's tariffs. For example, tariffs on steel and aluminum imposed under other laws remain in effect. However, the court canceled tariffs in two categories.
The first category is "reciprocal" tariffs, which ranged from 34% for China to 10% for most other countries. The second category is the 25% tariffs on certain goods from Canada, China, and Mexico, imposed under the pretext of insufficient measures to combat fentanyl supplies.
