IEEPA Tariffs Struck Down

The Supreme Court ruled on February 20 that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act does not let a president impose tariffs, wiping out a fast-track trade weapon the White House had used against China and other countries. (supremecourt.gov) The case was *Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump*, decided 6-3 after arguments on November 5, 2025. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the majority, and the court said the 1977 law lets presidents “regulate” imports during an emergency but does not clearly authorize tariffs. (supremecourt.gov) The tariffs at issue covered two buckets. One set hit imports from Canada, Mexico and China over fentanyl trafficking, including a 10% duty on most Chinese goods; another set imposed at least 10% duties on imports from all trading partners under a separate trade-deficit emergency. (supremecourt.gov) The ruling left one major question unresolved: refunds. SCOTUSblog said the justices did not decide whether importers who already paid the duties — estimated in 2025 at more than $200 billion — must get that money back. (scotusblog.com) That matters for China because the administration had treated emergency tariffs as leverage in trade talks. Reuters reported on March 26 that Trump’s planned Beijing trip was reset for May 14-15 and that the February ruling had already curtailed a source of U.S. bargaining power with its third-biggest trading partner. (usnews.com) The legal fight turned on a basic question: can a president tax imports under a law Congress wrote for emergencies? The majority said Congress knows how to delegate tariff power explicitly, and IEEPA does not use words like “tariff” or “duty.” (supremecourt.gov; scotusblog.com) Justice Brett Kavanaugh dissented and warned the decision could force the government to refund billions of dollars and unsettle trade deals tied to the tariffs. He argued IEEPA’s grant of power to “regulate” imports should be read broadly in national emergencies. (scotusblog.com) The plaintiffs were not just states and trade groups. The Supreme Court opinion says two small businesses sued in Washington, and five small businesses plus 12 states sued in the Court of International Trade after the administration rolled out the duties through executive orders. (supremecourt.gov) The administration still has other tariff statutes on the books, but this decision closed off the emergency route it had used for speed and reach. With Trump and Xi set to meet in Beijing on May 14 and 15, the court’s ruling changed the legal ground under one of Washington’s main pressure tactics before the talks even begin. (usnews.com; supremecourt.gov)