GOP call for legislative fix after SCOTUS nixes Trump tariffs

Benjamin Weiss

WASHINGTON (CN) — As the Supreme Court hobbled President Donald Trump’s ability to unilaterally impose tariffs on U.S. imports, some congressional Republicans incensed by the high court’s ruling said it was time for lawmakers to etch the president’s international trade regime into federal law.

In a blockbuster 6-3 decision, the justices on Friday ruled that Trump could not claim emergency powers to issue tariffs on foreign imports without approval from Congress. The ruling is a major defeat for the president, who has long made international trade a centerpiece of his policy agenda and has frequently used tariffs or threats of tariffs as a cudgel against U.S. trading partners.

The White House relied on the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act as the legal basis for a sweeping slate of tariffs in April as Trump declared a national emergency over what he framed as “large and persistent” U.S. trade deficits. But the Supreme Court held the Constitution hands tariff authority to Congress, not the executive, and that the IEEPA did not give the president authority to unilaterally impose import duties.

On Capitol Hill, some Republican lawmakers were furious about the high court’s decision. Ohio Senator Bernie Moreno, long a supporter of Trump’s tariff regime, called the ruling “outrageous” and said that it “handcuffs our fight against unfair trade that has devastated American workers for decades.”

And Moreno called on his fellow lawmakers to pass legislation that would put Congress’ stamp of approval on the Trump tariffs.

“This betrayal must be reversed and Republicans must get to work immediately on a reconciliation bill to codify the tariffs that had made our country the hottest country on earth!” the Ohio senator wrote in a post on X.

Tennessee Representative John Rose concurred, saying in a statement that while the Supreme Court’s ruling represented “a giant leap backward,” the justices had effectively given lawmakers the go-ahead to legislate the White House’s tariff regime into law.

“[I]t is the high court’s opinion that it is now up to Congress to protect U.S. economic interests,” said Rose. “I’m ready to lead the effort to empower the president to continue his very effective work.”

House Speaker Mike Johnson, for his part, appeared to leave the door open to a reconciliation package inking the Trump tariffs, writing in a statement that Congress and the White House would “determine the best path forward in the coming weeks.”

Still, other congressional Republicans left the ball in the executive’s court, arguing that the administration could rely on other sections of federal law to justify imposing tariffs without Congress. Florida Representative Carlos Gimenez pointed to several options, including Section 232 of the 1962 Trade Expansion Act or Section 201 of the 1974 Trade Act, which could allow Trump to levy targeted import duties on certain goods.

“President Trump has MANY options to impose decisive economic action against rogue regimes,” Gimenez wrote on X.

And Kansas Senator Roger Marshall said the Supreme Court’s decision would not stop him from “using every tool available to fight for American workers, rebuild U.S. manufacturing and put America first.”

Writing in his dissent Friday morning, Justice Brett Kavanaugh cited the Trade Expansion Act and Trade Act as possible routes for the Trump administration to pursue unilateral tariff authority. “In essence, the court today concludes that the president checked the wrong statutory box by relying on IEEPA rather than another statute to impose these tariffs,” he said.

Democrats, meanwhile, took a victory lap following the high court’s ruling.

“We’ve said from day one: A president cannot ignore Congress and unilaterally slap tariffs on Americans,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said in a statement. “That overreach failed. Now Trump should end this reckless trade war for good and finally give families and small businesses the relief they deserve.”

Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin said the decision was a “win for the American people” and that it formed a “rare instance” in which the conservative-leaning Supreme Court used its constitutional authority to “stop the corruption and chaos of the Trump presidency.”

Some Republicans also offered less critical reactions to the decision. Iowa Senator Chuck Grassley, who has previously championed legislation to reaffirm Congress’ power over tariffs, said he appreciated Trump’s approach to trade policy but did not appear to oppose the high court’s ruling.

“I’m one of the only sitting members of Congress who was in office during IEEPA’s passage,” the senator said in a statement. “Since then, I’ve made clear Congress needs to reassert its constitutional role over commerce, which is why I introduced prospective legislation that would give Congress a say when tariffs are levied in the future.”

Kentucky Senator Rand Paul said the Supreme Court had defended the Constitution by rejecting Trump’s use of emergency powers to impose tariffs without input from lawmakers.

“Tariffs are taxes and the power to declare them belongs to the Congress,” he said. “This goes beyond the case. No future administration, including a socialist one, can use ‘emergency’ powers to get around Congress and tax by decree.”

Trump, meanwhile, had yet to address the ruling as of Friday morning. He was expected to hold a news conference on the subject later in the day.