U.S. President Donald Trump said Friday he will move to impose a new 10 % tariff on imports from all countries, hours after the United States Supreme Court ruled he exceeded his authority by using emergency powers to levy tariffs on Canada, Mexico and other trading partners. Speaking at the White House, Trump described the universal duty as a “baseline” measure aimed at protecting American industry and rebalancing trade as his administration looks for other legal pathways to keep a sweeping tariff agenda in place.In a 6-3 decision, the court held that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) does not authorize the president to impose tariffs, striking down a major component of Trump’s strategy for rapid, across-the-board duties justified by national emergencies. Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the majority, said the law “does not authorize the President to impose tariffs,” while the court emphasized Congress’ constitutional authority over taxation and tariffs.The majority coalition included both conservative and liberal justices, though the court split over the reasoning beyond the central holding. Reporting on the decision said some justices grounded their analysis in doctrines requiring clear congressional authorization for executive actions with major economic or political impact, while other opinions focused on limits to how much Congress can delegate its power.Trump responded with a combative, wide-ranging statement in which he denounced the ruling as “deeply disappointing” and said he was “ashamed of certain members of the court.” He accused some justices of being “fools and lap dogs for the rhinos and the radical left Democrats,” claimed he had held back while the case was pending — “I went to be a good boy,” he said — and mocked what he described as the decision’s logic: “I can do anything I want… but I can’t charge $1.”At the same time, Trump signalled he would pivot to other statutory authorities that remain available to the executive branch, arguing the ruling left him alternative tools that could be “even stronger” than IEEPA for restricting trade. Legal analysis of the decision has noted that other laws can allow tariffs in narrower circumstances — often with more procedural requirements — such as time-limited measures tied to balance-of-payments concerns or product-specific tariffs tied to national security findings.The ruling also sharpened uncertainty for businesses that paid the invalidated duties, with the decision expected to fuel litigation over refunds and the mechanics of repayment. Reuters reported that more than $175 billion had been collected under the challenged tariffs, raising questions about the scope of repayments and how claims would be processed.Markets were relatively muted as investors weighed the immediate impact of the court’s decision against expectations that the White House will attempt to reimpose tariffs under different legal authorities. Coverage of the market reaction noted gains in some import-heavy retail and apparel names even as broader indexes moved modestly, reflecting uncertainty about how quickly — if at all — the administration can restore wide-ranging duties.
