A Defeat for the Tariff Agenda: The Supreme Court’s 6-3 Ruling Explained

By Tom Melia

On February 20, 2026, the Supreme Court issued a 6-3 ruling in Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump, declaring President Trump is not authorized to continue his tariff agenda. The battle centered on the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) of 1977. Since early 2025, the Trump administration has used this law to bypass Congress, declaring national emergencies related to trade deficits, fentanyl trafficking, and border security. This was used to justify massive tariffs against imports from China, Canada, Mexico, and eventually nearly every trading partner. 

The administration argued that the IEEPA provided the President with the power to tariff. They cited the President’s ability to "regulate... importation" under the IEEPA, implicitly granting the executive branch freedom to act as necessary in times of emergency. However, the majority of the court disagreed. Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the majority, held that "the vehicle is the imposition of taxes on Americans, and that has always been a core power of Congress," referencing the impact tariffs have on Americans, and how that power is reserved for the law-making branch. 

The arguments against the tariff varied, as the majority included conservatives and liberals. The conservatives in the majority argued that the power to tariff was not clearly delegated to the president under the IEEPA, and that means Congress retains the power. This group of conservatives in the majority included Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Gorsuch and Barrett.

The liberals in the majority agreed the tariffs were illegal but relied on traditional statutory interpretation. They argued that because the IEEPA doesn’t explicitly mention “tariffs,” it isn’t reasonable for the president to assume that power. Justices Kagan, Sotomayor, and Jackson, the only liberal members of the court, composed this bloc.

The minority, led by Justice Kavanaugh, warned of a looming "mess," noting that the federal government may now be required to refund billions to companies that have already passed those costs on to consumers. Lower courts, specifically the U.S. Court of International Trade, will now have to navigate the logistical nightmare of processing these claims. Since their inception, these IEEPA-based tariffs have collected an estimated $160 billion to $200 billion in revenue. While the Court declared the tariffs illegal, it did not provide a specific roadmap for how that money should be returned to importers. However, many have pointed out that this “mess” doesn’t impact the constitutionality of the tariffs, over which the logistics hold no bearing. 

President Trump was quick to respond, calling the ruling a “disgrace” and announcing plans to pivot to other legal standing for tariffs. Trump signed an executive order under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 creating a 10% global tariff within hours of the decision. He has also made clear his intention to reinstate the tariffs struck down by this ruling.