The Daily Supreme Court Seems Skeptical of Trump’s Tariffs
541 snips
Nov 6, 2025 
Adam Liptak, a Supreme Court reporter for The New York Times, provides expert analysis on the Court's skepticism regarding Trump's high tariffs. He discusses the shift from traditional tariff statutes to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act and the significance of the Court's strict textual analysis. Liptak also highlights concerns about presidential overreach and the potential implications for trade policy and judicial independence, while speculating on how a ruling against the administration could impact Trump's agenda.
AI Snips
Chapters
Transcript
Episode notes
IEPA Lacks Explicit Tariff Language
- The case tests whether Congress authorized Trump's sweeping second-term tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEPA).
- Adam Liptak explains IEPA was meant for emergencies and does not mention tariffs explicitly.
Regulate Importation Versus Taxing Power
- The administration argues 'regulate importation' naturally embraces tariffs as a form of regulation.
- Challengers respond tariffs are taxes and taxing power belongs to Congress alone.
Justices Flag Missing Explicit Terms
- Several justices emphasized Congress knows how to authorize tariffs and often uses explicit words like 'duties' or 'taxes'.
- The absence of those explicit terms in IEPA weighed heavily in skeptical questioning.