Trump’s New Tariffs Face Legal Scrutiny Following Supreme Court Ruling
WASHINGTON – A recent move by U.S. President Donald Trump to impose a 15% global tariff on goods has ignited a legal debate, with prominent legal figures questioning its validity following a recent Supreme Court decision. The tariffs, announced after the court largely struck down earlier tariff actions, are drawing criticism for potentially overstepping constitutional boundaries.
The Supreme Court, in a 6-3 ruling, determined that the Trump administration had exceeded its authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) of 1977, reaffirming Congress’s primary power to regulate taxation. Trump, however, swiftly responded by enacting the new tariffs under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, a move now under intense scrutiny.
“If he wants sweeping tariffs, he should do the American thing and go to Congress,” argued Neal Katyal, an Indian-American lawyer who recently secured a victory against Trump’s earlier trade measures before the Supreme Court. “If his tariffs are such a good idea, he should have no problem persuading Congress. That’s what our Constitution requires.”
Katyal, a partner at Milbank LLP and professor at Georgetown University Law Center, highlighted a previous legal argument made by the Department of Justice (DOJ) in a case he litigated. The DOJ had asserted that Section 122 was not applicable to trade deficits, which differ conceptually from balance-of-payments deficits. He shared a post on X (formerly Twitter) referencing this prior position, questioning the basis for the current tariff implementation.
Seems hard for the President to rely on the 15 percent statute (sec 122) when his DOJ in our case told the Court the opposite: “Nor does [122] have any obvious application here, where the concerns the President identified in declaring an emergency arise from trade deficits, which…
— Neal Katyal (@neal_katyal) February 21, 2026
Economist and former International Monetary Fund (IMF) First Deputy Managing Director Gita Gopinath echoed Katyal’s analysis, reinforcing the distinction between trade and balance-of-payments deficits.
.@neal_katyal speaking International Economics 101:“Nor does [122] have any obvious application here, where the concerns the President identified in declaring an emergency arise from trade deficits, which are conceptually distinct from balance-of-payments deficits.” https://t.co/lQyeKGJ4Hi
— Gita Gopinath (@GitaGopinath) February 21, 2026
The new tariffs are expected to impact global trade, including relationships with key partners like India. A White House official stated that countries, including India, would be subject to the tariffs unless a different legal authority is invoked. This development occurs as the U.S. and India are currently negotiating an interim trade agreement involving tariff adjustments on various goods.
Trump defended his actions on Truth Social, labeling the Supreme Court’s judgment as “extraordinarily anti-American” and asserting the legality of the 15% tariff level.
The legal challenge to these tariffs underscores a broader debate about presidential authority and the role of Congress in trade policy. The U.S. Constitution vests the power of the purse – and therefore, the power to impose taxes – primarily with the legislative branch. This case could set a significant precedent for future trade disputes and the balance of power between the executive and legislative branches.
Who is Neal Katyal?
Born in Chicago to Indian immigrant parents, Katyal has established himself as a leading constitutional lawyer. A graduate of Dartmouth College and Yale Law School, he clerked for Justice Stephen Breyer of the Supreme Court. He served as Acting Solicitor General under President Barack Obama in 2010, arguing over 50 cases before the Supreme Court, a record for minority advocates. His career has been dedicated to high-stakes constitutional battles, including defending the Voting Rights Act and challenging the Trump administration’s travel ban.
(This article incorporates reporting from NDTV.)