In February 2026, the Supreme Court issued a landmark 6-3 ruling in Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump, holding that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) does not authorize the president to unilaterally impose broad tariffs [15] [17] [18]. This decision struck down the administration’s "Liberation Day" tariffs, forcing the government to refund over $166 billion collected from hundreds of thousands of businesses [4] [11] [15].
Redefining Presidential Trade Authority
The Court’s decision significantly curtailed the executive branch’s ability to bypass Congress when setting trade policy under emergency statutes [15] [19]. By affirming that the IEEPA is not a tool for sweeping, universal duties, the ruling reasserted Congress’s constitutional role in controlling tax and tariff policy under Article I [4] [15] [19].
Pivot to Alternative Statutes
Following the setback, the administration has shifted its strategy to utilize more targeted authorities, specifically Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 and Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 [2] [3] [8]. While these laws provide narrower, sector-specific or practice-based grounds for trade action, they have also become the subject of new, ongoing litigation in the U.S. Court of International Trade regarding the extent of presidential discretion [12] [13] [18].
Sources
- Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump – Wikipedia
- Tariffs in the second Trump administration – Wikipedia
- New Challenge Targets Trump’s 10% to 12.5% Tariffs in Trade Court
- The Supreme Court struck down Trump's global tariffs, and the refunds …
- Trump’s latest global tariffs face trade court challenge | CNBC …
- The new Court fight over Trump’s replacement global tariffs
- Liberation Day tariffs – Wikipedia
- Tariff Authorities In The Lindsey O. Graham Sanctioning Russia …
- U.S. trade court to weigh challenge to Trump’s forced labour tariffs
- U.S. trade court to weigh challenge to Trump’s forced labour tariffs