‘Seems hard to rely on’: Top lawyer behind SC blow questions Trump’s 15% tariff authority again

Neal Katyal, the Supreme Court lawyer who helped secure a ruling striking down US President Donald Trump’s tariffs, has again questioned the legality of the White House’s latest move – this time targeting the proposed 15 per cent global tariff.

Reacting on Saturday after Trump raised tariffs from 10 per cent to 15 per cent using a different statutory route, Katyal argued that the administration’s position appears inconsistent with what its own Justice Department told the court. 

“Seems hard for the President to rely on the 15 per cent statute (sec 122) when his DOJ in our case told the Court the opposite,” Katyal wrote on X.

Also read: Supreme Court blow to Trump’s ‘Liberation Day’ tariffs alters tactics, not strategy: Brahma Chellaney

He cited the government’s earlier submission to the justices: “Nor does [122] have any obvious application here, where the concerns the President identified in declaring an emergency arise from trade deficits, which are conceptually distinct from balance-of-payments deficits.”

“If he wants sweeping tariffs, he should do the American thing and go to Congress. If his tariffs are such a good idea, he should have no problem persuading Congress. That’s what our Constitution requires.”

Trump had announced on Saturday that he had raised the global tariff to 15 per cent, up from the 10 per cent rate he unveiled a day earlier, after the Supreme Court struck down many of the tariffs he imposed last year.

By a 6-3 vote, the justices ruled that Trump could not unilaterally set and change tariffs under the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), saying the power to tax lies with Congress.

At issue were the double-digit tariffs Trump had imposed on nearly every country by invoking emergency powers. The court found that IEEPA did not grant the president authority to tax imports. 

Despite the ruling, Trump signalled that he intends to continue reshaping US trade policy.

On social media, he wrote that he was acting “based on a thorough, detailed, and complete review of the ridiculous, poorly written, and extraordinarily anti-American decision on Tariffs issued yesterday.”

He said he would rely on a different, more limited statutory authority and had already signed an executive order allowing him to bypass Congress and impose a 10 per cent tax on imports from around the world, starting Tuesday – the same day as his State of the Union address. Those tariffs are limited to 150 days unless extended by legislation.

In addition to the temporary 15 per cent tariffs he now proposes, Trump said he would pursue other levies under sections of federal law requiring investigations by the Commerce Department. “During the next short number of months, the Trump Administration will determine and issue the new and legally permissible Tariffs, which will continue our extraordinarily successful process of Making America Great Again,” he wrote.

Katyal has emerged as a central figure in the case that led to Friday’s ruling. Representing a group of small businesses before the court, he described the decision as a “complete and total victory.”

After the judgment, he said the ruling reaffirmed constitutional limits on executive power. “Today, the US Supreme Court stood up for the rule of law and Americans everywhere. In America, only Congress can impose taxes on the American people,” Katyal said. He also noted that two of Trump’s three Supreme Court appointees voted against him in the case.