...
By Sam Stevenson
Associate News Editor
0
Share
Newsweek is a Trust Project member
See more of our trusted coverage when you search.Prefer Newsweek on Googleto see more of our trusted coverage when you search.
Many U.S. tariffs remain in place despite a Supreme Court ruling that struck down President Donald Trump’s use of emergency powers to impose sweeping global levies.
Why It Matters
The Supreme Court ruled that Trump overstepped his authority by using emergency law to impose broad, worldwide tariffs, dealing a major blow to a central economic policy of his presidency.
Read More on News
The decision reshaped—but did not erase—the U.S. tariff landscape.
Industry-specific tariffs imposed on national security grounds under Section 232—covering key sectors such as steel, aluminum, autos and parts, lumber, furniture, and some semiconductors—were not affected by the Court’s ruling and remain in force.
...
What To Know
The court’s decision invalidated Trump’s so‑called “reciprocal” global tariffs imposed under emergency powers, but it did not unwind every duty already on the books.
As a result, many tariffs affecting everyday goods are still being collected.
Levies on steel and aluminum, imported vehicles and auto parts, copper products, furniture, cabinets, and a range of other manufactured goods remain in force.
The following industry-specific tariffs remain active under Section 232 and were not impacted by the Supreme Court ruling:
- Steel (50 percent)
- Aluminum (50 percent)
- Autos and auto parts (25 percent)
- Copper parts (50 percent)
- Timber and lumber (10 percent)
- Cabinets and vanities (25 percent)
- Upholstered furniture (25 percent)
- Heavy-duty trucks (25 percent)
- Buses (10 percent)
- Certain semiconductors and chipmaking equipment (25 percent)
Certain food and agricultural imports are also still subject to duties, alongside country‑specific tariffs that were imposed under different legal authorities or tied to separate trade actions.
Trump’s administration reached arrangements with some partners to lower auto tariffs to the 10 to 15 percent range, including the United Kingdom and Japan, while a South Korea deal was announced, but changes remain unclear.
The ruling also left unresolved what happens to the billions of dollars already paid by importers.
The justices did not order automatic refunds, setting up what is expected to be a long and complex fight over whether companies—and potentially consumers—will see any money returned.
Trump has pushed back hard on the decision and signaled he will continue to pursue tariffs through other means.
Within hours of the ruling, he argued the court had tied the presidency’s hands on trade, while suggesting alternative tools remain available to advance his agenda.
For now, the practical effect is a narrower but still significant tariff regime that continues to shape prices, supply chains, and trade relationships across the U.S. economy.
What People Are Saying
Trump said: "The Supreme Court's ruling on tariffs is deeply disappointing, and I'm ashamed of certain members of the court absolutely ashamed."
Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer called the ruling "a victory for the wallets of every American consumer."
Minority Leader of the U.S. House of Representatives, Representative Hakeem Jeffries, said it was "a big victory for the American people," and "another crushing defeat for the wannabe King."
New York Governor Kathy Hochul described the tariffs as “an unlawful backdoor tax on hardworking families, farmers and small businesses, raising prices on everything from groceries to building materials.”
Turning Point USA spokesperson Andrew Kolvet wrote on X: "Yes SCOTUS ruled against President Trump on tariffs. I believe it ruled incorrectly. If a president can sanction other countries, he should be able to tariff them as well to counter them when they cheat at trade. But the sky isn’t necessarily falling. President Trump has other mechanisms he can use to enact his tariff policies besides emergency declarations."
House Speaker Mike Johnson said on X: "No one can deny that the President’s use of tariffs has brought in billions of dollars and created immense leverage for America’s trade strategy and for securing strong, reciprocal America-first trade agreements with countries that had been taking advantage of American workers for decades. Congress and the Administration will determine the best path forward in the coming weeks."
Wisconsin Republican Senator Ron Johnson wrote on X: "The tariff case cried out for a unanimous decision. However, both sides made reasonable arguments leading to a split decision. In the end, SCOTUS decided nothing and created a HUGE mess. But the underlying mess is created by sloppy congressional language in bills that are not adequately thought through—the half-assed and unprofessional process that I witness daily."
Brigitte Gabriel, founder of ACT for America, posted on X: "Terrible decision by the Supreme Court. A President should have the authority to protect his country with tariffs!"
What Happens Next
Attention now shifts to Congress and the administration, which must decide whether to rewrite trade laws or pursue new tariffs using different legal authority.
Separately, lower courts are expected to grapple with refund claims tied to duties already paid.
View 0 Comments
Submit Correction
View Editorial & AI Guidelines