He is using a temporary import surcharge under a rarely used 1974 Trade Act provision and launched 76 Section 301 investigations covering 60 economies.
The move restores many duties the court struck down under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, while requiring executive investigations or reports and preserving broad waiver discretion.
The report argues Congress, not courts alone, must modernise tariff laws as outdated statutes have let presidents from both parties dominate trade policy, unsettling markets, allies and constitutional checks.
With one presidential tariff authority gone, are the administration's alternative trade actions creating even more market instability?
Can Congress reform outdated trade laws before executive actions permanently reshape global commerce?
What hurdles are preventing American importers from reclaiming $166 billion in tariffs the Supreme Court just ruled illegal?
Trump’s Tariff Pivot After Supreme Court Rejection: Legal Battles, Economic Impact, and Global Trade Strains
Overview
In February 2026, the Supreme Court struck down former President Trump's broad tariffs under the emergency powers act, reaffirming Congress's exclusive authority over trade policy. In response, Trump quickly imposed a new 10% global tariff under a different law, which faced legal challenges and was also struck down by the U.S. Court of International Trade in May. These tariffs raised costs for key industries like automotive and pharmaceuticals, caused moderate consumer price increases, and triggered retaliatory tariffs from China, Canada, and Mexico. The trade measures disrupted global supply chains, contributed to a slight global GDP decline, and intensified political and constitutional debates over executive power and congressional oversight in trade policy.