The United States Supreme Court will today, Wednesday, November 5, hear a crucial case that could either uphold or overturn a central pillar of President Donald Trump’s economic policy, his sweeping use of tariffs.
Naijaonpoint reports that the decision could reshape America’s trade landscape and define how much power a president truly has over the economy.
At stake are billions of dollars in customs revenue and the credibility of Trump’s aggressive trade war strategy. For months, the case has divided opinion among legal scholars, economists, and political stakeholders in the country.
Trump has framed the case in dramatic terms, calling it one of the most significant in U.S. history.
On his Truth Social platform on Tuesday, he wrote: “This case is, literally, LIFE OR DEATH for our Country.”
He added that the ability to impose tariffs quickly is vital for national security, warning that America would be “defenseless” without it.
“If a President was not able to quickly and nimbly use the power of Tariffs, we would be defenseless, leading perhaps even to the ruination of our Nation,” he posted earlier this week.
At the heart of the case is Trump’s decision to use emergency powers under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose sweeping “reciprocal” tariffs on most U.S. trade partners. He also levied duties on Mexico, Canada, and China, accusing them of contributing to illegal drug inflows into the U.S.
Opponents, including business groups and state governments, argue that the president overstepped his authority. They point out that the IEEPA does not explicitly mention tariffs or taxes, powers which the U.S. Constitution reserves for Congress.
Their lawyers contend that while the president may “regulate” trade during emergencies, he cannot impose new taxes “on every corner of the economy.”
They further argue that trade deficits and drug smuggling do not meet the law’s definition of an “unusual and extraordinary threat.”
Naijaonpoint reports that earlier this year, a lower court ruled that Trump’s blanket tariffs were unlawful, saying he exceeded the authority granted under the IEEPA. That ruling was later upheld by an appeals court, forcing Trump’s legal team to take the fight to the Supreme Court.
Notably, the case does not cover Trump’s sector-specific tariffs on steel, aluminum, and automobiles. Instead, it focuses on his broader “reciprocal tariffs” that affect nearly every trading partner.
Since returning to the White House, Trump has raised the U.S. average effective tariff rate to its highest level since the Great Depression era of the 1930s.
While Trump hinted he might attend the hearing in person, he later backed down, saying he did not want to “distract” from the significance of the proceedings.
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, however, confirmed on Fox News that he intends to “have a ringside seat.”
When asked if his presence could be seen as an attempt to influence the justices, he replied, “They can say what they want. I am there to emphasize that this is an economic emergency.”
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters that the administration was confident in its legal position but was “always preparing for Plan B” should the court rule against them.
Businesses and Lawmakers Push Back
The case has drawn intense interest from the business community. More than 40 legal briefs have been filed opposing Trump’s tariffs, representing small businesses, trade groups, and several states.
Only a handful have supported the administration.
Many small firms say the tariffs have increased their import costs and squeezed profit margins, even if they haven’t yet triggered widespread inflation.
“These policies hurt American producers more than they help,” one trade association leader told AFP.
If the Supreme Court rules against Trump, the administration could still fall back on other trade laws that allow for temporary tariffs, up to 15 per cent for 150 days, while further investigations are conducted.
However, such a ruling would be a major blow to Trump’s authority and a warning to future presidents about overreach in economic policy.
It could also unsettle global trade partners who struck deals under the current tariff framework and may now be forced back to the negotiating table.
The Court’s decision may take several months. Still, one thing is clear: the ruling will carry enormous implications, not only for the U.S. economy but also for presidential power in a rapidly changing global trade environment.
© 2025 Naijaonpoint, a division of NOP Media Inc. Contact us via [email protected]