SCOTUS takes a stand against Trump’s tariffs

What does the Supreme Court’s rebuke of President Donald Trump’s tariff policy say about the limits on presidential authority? Does the court’s 6-3 decision show that constitutional checks and balances are working as intended? 

The court decided Friday that the government’s collection of $133 billion dollars in tariff revenue was unlawful. How refunds will be handled, and how much money might ultimately be returned, remains unclear.  That repayment process is still being resolved and could prove to be a chaotic one.

President Trump hasn’t hidden his anger at the decision, calling it a “disgrace,” adding he’s “ashamed of certain members of the court.” He also promised to pursue alternative means for maintaining his tariffs and announced plans to impose new global tariffs of up to 15% using different legal authority.

The decision is a big setback to the president’s economic agenda and his presidential authority. Tariffs have been the centerpiece of Trump’s economic platform, and he has often referred to tariffs as ‘the most beautiful word” in the dictionary, arguing that they will boost American manufacturing, reduce trade deficits and increase federal revenue.

But many economists — and lawmakers from both parties — say the president’s tariffs have raised costs for consumers and businesses, fueled inflation and added uncertainty to the financial markets.

Today we’re examining the high court’s decision from legal, political and economic perspectives, including whether consumers will see any relief.

Guests:
– Kate Shaw, professor of law at the University of Pennsylvania and co-host of the podcast “Strict Scrutiny”
– Rana Foroohar, global business columnist and associate editor at the Financial Times