The U.S. Supreme Court began hearing arguments on Wednesday regarding the broad powers claimed by former President Donald Trump to impose tariffs on foreign goods. Critics have warned that a ruling in favor of Trump could lead to the creation of a “presidency without limits.”
In April, Trump implemented unprecedented tariffs on nearly every country globally, utilizing authority granted under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). This law, enacted in 1977, permits the president to regulate international commerce during major emergencies, such as wars.
Many critics argue that using IEEPA as a legal basis for a global tariff system represents a significant misuse of the law’s original intent. They are calling on the Supreme Court to invalidate the practice.
Brett Edkins, managing director of policy and political affairs at Stand Up America, expressed concern that granting the president extensive control over imported goods would “open the door to broader abuses of power,” potentially enabling further encroachments on congressional authority.
“We’re already dangerously close to a presidency without limits,” he said. “It’s time for the right-wing majority on the court to stand up for our Constitution and serve as a check on Trump’s power, starting with this case.”
Josh Orton, president of the progressive legal advocacy group Demand Justice, emphasized that the case before the Supreme Court extends beyond economic or trade-law issues, highlighting its implications for the separation of powers outlined in the U.S. Constitution.
“Trump is demanding that the court hand him raw power over the economy,” Orton stated. “If Trump wins here, he won’t just raise costs on American families. He will cement a precedent that expands his power as executive in a dangerous and unprecedented way—letting any president unilaterally rewrite trade law, punish certain industries, harm consumers, or leverage international allies for personal gain.”
Leor Tal, campaign director at Unrig Our Economy, argued that the Supreme Court may not need to hear the case if Congress reasserts its constitutional authority to levy taxes.
“As the Supreme Court hears a case with implications for whether Americans can afford groceries, school supplies, and more, people will remember that Republicans in Congress could end these disastrous tariffs today and should have done so a long time ago,” she said. “These tariffs are nothing more than a tax on working Americans, and Republicans in Congress have voted time and again to keep them in place… Republicans in Congress must act immediately to repeal Trump’s tariffs and finally put working people first.”
During the hearing, conservative Justice Neil Gorsuch raised concerns about the potential for the president to indefinitely seize congressional powers through emergency declarations, which would require Congress to vote to reclaim its authority.
“So Congress, as a practical matter, can’t get this power back once it’s handed it over to the president,” Gorsuch remarked. “It’s a one-way ratchet toward the gradual but continual accretion of power in the executive branch and away from the people’s elected representatives.”
Justice Sonia Sotomayor also questioned the separation of powers, emphasizing that taxation is a congressional responsibility.
“It’s a congressional power, not a presidential power, to tax,” she said. “You want to say tariffs are not taxes, but that’s exactly what they are. They’re generating money from American citizens, revenue.”
Before the hearing, Trump issued a message on Truth Social warning that his ability to impose tariffs was essential to national security, stating, “With a Victory, we have tremendous, but fair, financial and national security. Without it, we are virtually defenseless against other countries who have, for years, taken advantage of us.”
Meanwhile, Senator Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) criticized the tariffs, saying they were harming small businesses. “Trade authority begins and ends with Congress,” he said. “I’ll keep battling to rein in Trump’s tariff madness and protect small businesses, farmers, and families.”
Arabic 
English 