Supreme Court deals blow to Trump’s trade agenda in landmark tariff case
Since Trump’s return to office, tariff collections have risen roughly 300%
Charles Payne reveals the truth about tariffs
FOX Business host Charles Payne discusses the claims that tariffs are inflationary on 'Making Money.'
The Supreme Court dealt a blow to President Donald Trump’s trade agenda on Friday, siding against him in a case challenging the legality of tariffs that have shaped global markets and U.S. supply chains.
By a 6–3 vote, the majority concluded that the law cited to justify the import duties "does not authorize the President to impose tariffs." Chief Justice John Roberts delivered the opinion of the court. Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Brett Kavanaugh dissented.
The White House did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital's request for comment.
TRUMP DEFENDS TARIFFS, SAYS US HAS BEEN ‘THE KING OF BEING SCREWED’ BY TRADE IMBALANCE
President Donald Trump announced his "Liberation Day" reciprocal tariffs in April 2025. (Brendan Smialowski/AFP/Getty Images / Getty Images)
The two cases, which Trump has described as "life or death" for the United States, have forced the Supreme Court to confront how far a president can go in reshaping U.S. trade policy.
The challenges — Learning Resources Inc. v. Trump and Trump v. V.O.S. Selections Inc. — were brought by an educational toy manufacturer and a family-owned wine and spirits importer challenging the legality of Trump’s tariffs.
Both cases turn on a central question: whether the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) gave the president authority to impose the tariffs, or whether that move crossed constitutional lines. The disputes followed Trump's so-called "Liberation Day" tariffs in April, a sweeping package of import duties he said would address trade imbalances and reduce reliance on foreign goods.
US TARIFF REVENUE UP 300% UNDER TRUMP AS SUPREME COURT BATTLE LOOMS
Trump has promised to use some of the revenue from tariffs to issue $2,000 checks to Americans and to pay down the nation's debt. (Mark Ralston/AFP/Getty Images)
The ruling comes as tariff revenue and the economic stakes associated with it have surged to record levels.
Duties jumped from $9.6 billion in March to $23.9 billion in May following the rollout of the tariffs. For fiscal 2025, which ended Sept. 30, collections reached $215.2 billion, according to Treasury data, and the upward trend has continued into fiscal 2026, with receipts already outpacing last year.
Since Trump’s return to office, tariff collections have risen roughly 300%, delivering a major windfall to federal coffers. In January alone, duties totaled $30.4 billion — up 275% from a year earlier — and revenue for the current fiscal year has reached $124 billion, a roughly 304% increase from the same period last year.
TRUMP SAYS SUPREME COURT CASE ON TRADE IS 'LIFE OR DEATH' FOR THE US
Tariffs function as a tax on imports, and in many cases U.S. importers absorb the upfront cost and then pass it along through higher prices for wholesalers, retailers and, ultimately, consumers. That means households and businesses may face increased costs for goods ranging from electronics to raw materials.
Whether tariffs ultimately help or hurt the economy depends on how much of that burden consumers absorb, how domestic producers respond and whether the intended economic or geopolitical advantages are worth the added costs to consumers.
That dynamic makes the high court’s ruling especially consequential for households and businesses already navigating elevated costs.
The revenue surge underscores how central tariffs have become to Trump’s economic agenda, with the administration arguing that duty collections can help fund domestic priorities, reduce the nation’s debt and even deliver a proposed $2,000 dividend to Americans.
But with total obligations hovering just north of $38 trillion, tariff revenue amounts to little more than a rounding error — billions collected against trillions owed.
CLICK HERE TO GET FOX BUSINESS ON THE GO
The president maintains, however, that aggressive tariffs are necessary to confront what he considers years of unfair global trade, a stance that shows how firmly trade policy is embedded in his broader economic strategy.
With affordability a central concern for voters heading into the midterm elections, any policy that raises consumer prices is likely to face heightened political scrutiny.