The U.S. Supreme Court is preparing to rule on President Donald Trump's use of emergency powers under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose sweeping tariffs, a case that could redefine the balance of trade authority between Congress and the White House.
At issue is whether IEEPA, a 1977 statute designed to address national emergencies, permits a president to levy broad import duties by declaring an emergency. The case has drawn scrutiny from lawmakers and financial markets alike, as it tests how easily Congress could unwind tariffs once enacted-particularly if a repeal effort is met with a presidential veto.
During oral arguments in November, Justice Neil Gorsuch questioned the long-term consequences of endorsing the administration's reading of the statute. "What president's ever going to give that power back? A pretty rare president," Gorsuch said at the hearing, according to The Hill's courts newsletter The Gavel.
Justice Amy Coney Barrett pressed a related concern, asking whether Congress would find it "very hard" to reclaim tariff authority if the Court sided with the executive branch. Her questioning underscored anxiety among several justices that an expansive interpretation of IEEPA could effectively shift tariff-setting power from Congress-where Article I of the Constitution places it-to the presidency.
Solicitor General D. John Sauer defended the administration's position, arguing that IEEPA includes built-in political checks. He pointed to Congress's decision to terminate the COVID-19 national emergency as evidence that lawmakers can act if they believe executive authority has been overextended.
The Supreme Court has indicated it will release opinions on multiple days in the coming week. More than 100 days have passed since oral arguments, fueling speculation that the tariff case could be among the forthcoming decisions.
As the justices deliberate, Congress has delivered an early signal of unease. On 11 February, the House of Representatives voted 219-211 to repeal Trump's Canada tariffs by terminating the underlying emergency declaration. Six Republicans joined Democrats in backing the resolution.
Key figures from the House vote:
- 219-211 final tally in favor of repeal
- Six Republicans crossed party lines
- A two-thirds majority would be required to override a presidential veto
The measure now heads to the Senate. Even if it clears that chamber, it would likely face a veto from Trump, meaning lawmakers would need a two-thirds majority in both houses to override-an outcome that appears improbable given the House margin.
The House action followed internal Republican tensions. CBS News reported that several GOP lawmakers voted earlier to defeat a procedural rule that would have blocked votes challenging the president's tariffs, after a temporary restriction expired in January.
The constitutional stakes are considerable. If the Court upholds a broad reading of IEEPA, future presidents could rely on emergency declarations to reshape trade policy with limited congressional interference. If it narrows the statute's reach, lawmakers may reclaim leverage over tariff authority.
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, speaking publicly about the court's workload, noted that there are "lots of nuanced legal issues" and that "it takes a while to write," adding that the justices aim to be "thorough and clear" in their opinions.
