Supreme Court Rules Trump Tariffs Exceeded Authority

The Supreme Court's 6-3 decision in *Learning Resources Inc. v. Trump* on February 20, 2026, centered on the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) of 1977. The majority opinion, authored by Chief Justice John Roberts, asserted that the power to "regulate importation" under IEEPA does not grant the authority to levy taxes or tariffs, a power the Constitution explicitly gives to Congress. The ruling invoked the "major questions" doctrine, arguing that if Congress intended to delegate a matter of such vast economic and political significance as broad tariff authority, it must do so with explicit clarity. The Court noted that until this administration, no president had interpreted IEEPA as a tool for imposing tariffs. This decision specifically invalidates the "universal and reciprocal" tariffs and the "fentanyl" tariffs, among others. This ruling does not affect tariffs imposed under other statutes, such as the Section 232 tariffs on steel and aluminum or the Section 301 tariffs primarily targeting China. Those trade measures were enacted using different legal justifications and remain in place, separate from the IEEPA-based tariffs struck down by the court. The financial implications are substantial, with estimates of illegally collected tariffs ranging from over $130 billion to more than $200 billion. A judge at the U.S. Court of International Trade has already ordered the government to begin processing refunds with interest to the thousands of importers who paid the voided tariffs. In response to the ruling, former President Trump immediately imposed a new 10% global tariff under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, an authority never before used. This move has already triggered a new lawsuit from a coalition of two dozen states, arguing it is another instance of executive overreach.