“IEEPA contains no reference to tariffs or duties,” is the summation of the almost 200-page, 6-3 Supreme Court ruling today. In a blow to the Trump administration, the Supreme Court struck down the tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). The ruling does not resolve the refund process for the $200 billion that the US Treasury has collected over the last year. It does, however, specify the Congressional authority over tariffs, and is a rebuke to executive power in commerce. In a subsequent press conference, President Trump quickly announced new tariffs under different authorities. While today’s ruling fulfills the long-awaited response from the Supreme Court, it introduces more questions, more policy shifts, and is yet another factor fueling the growing global market uncertainty.
Some tariffs are struck down, while some remain, and new ones are introduced
Today’s Supreme Court ruling pertains to the ‘reciprocal tariffs’ established in April 2025 under IEEPA, which ranges from a 10% global baseline to 34% for China, as well as the 25% imposed on some goods from Canada, China, and Mexico over the flow of fentanyl into the United States. However, over the course of the past year, these numbers shifted significantly, leading to major swings and uncertainty for supply chains. For instance, India was one of the largest countries impacted, with tariffs reaching 50% until a bilateral trade agreement was reached in early February. Over a dozen recent trade agreements may also be under review following today’s ruling.
While IEEPA tariffs are a large portion of the tariffs deployed over the last year, they are not the entirety. The Trump administration has issued tariffs under Section 232 of the 1962 Trade Expansion Act, which focuses on products deemed critical to national security, such as copper and steel. There are also those tariffs under Section 301 of the 1974 Trade Act, which target unfair trade practices. Many tariffs on Chinese goods fall in this latter category. Neither of these are impacted by today’s ruling.
Some policy experts have also suggested Section 122 of the Trade Act and Section 338 of the Tariff Act provide additional mechanisms for the administration to pursue its tariff agenda. At the same time, the House of Representatives voted to revoke the tariffs on Canada, a potential signal that Congress may be reasserting itself in trade policy. In a statement by Senator Chuck Grassley, one of the only sitting members in Congress in office when IEEPA was passed, he argues for Congress to reassert its constitutional role over commerce.
While resolving the IEEPA tariffs, today’s ruling only surfaces more questions about the future of US tariff policy. The failure to address refunds means uncertainty will persist for small and large businesses alike, many of which have sued the administration for compensation.
The expansion of existing authorities will also be tightly monitored. In today’s press conference, President Trump announced a 10% global tariff under Section 122, and an expansion of Section 301 tariffs. This mirrors US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent’s remarks in December on the potential use of Section 301, Section 232, and Section 122 to “re-create the exact tariff structure” implemented under IEEPA. We will track this as details surface.
Global Market Uncertainty Persists
The future of US tariff policy is only one of several factors driving global uncertainty. As we detailed in our predictions report, the confluence of geopolitical shifts, trade route transformations, and commodity volatility, coupled with the various components of the AI race, further upend global markets already reeling from trade policy fluctuations.
We will be closely watching the market response to today’s ruling and the administration’s response. Stock markets jumped following the ruling, but this is likely short-lived. Treasuries fell, as did the dollar, following the ruling. Precious metals – gold, silver, platinum, and palladium – are initially up, but weaker than expected US GDP growth and the government shutdown indicate these gains may be short lived.
Today’s ruling does not come as a surprise but rather is reflective of the broader roller coaster upending US trade policy and global supply chains. In response to global tariffs and geopolitical realignment, global trade patterns shifted significantly last year. Trade policy is not alone in driving market uncertainty. Geopolitical conflict and tensions further erode global market stability, with the Russian invasion of Ukraine entering its fifth year and a buildup of US military presence in the Middle East to counter Iran contributing to this uncertainty. US-China global competition and AI disruptions further instigate market shocks.
As President Trump noted in today’s press conference, today’s ruling did not overrule tariffs but rather rejected a particular means for imposing tariffs. In short, while long awaited, the Supreme Court’s ruling was anticipated and reflects one of many pendulum shifts driving global uncertainty.