Just hours after one of his signature policies was struck down by the Supreme Court, President Trump announced a new 15% global tariff drawn from an entirely different legal authority — and in doing so, potentially invited an entirely new wave of court challenges that could follow the same path as the last.
Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, the law Trump invoked Saturday, has never been used by any president in the half century since it was enacted. While it technically permits tariffs of up to 15% for 150 days without congressional approval, its untested nature makes its judicial standing an open question. Legal scholars have already begun signaling that challenges are likely.
The Supreme Court had ruled 6-3 on Friday that Trump’s previous IEEPA-based tariffs were unconstitutional, requiring legislative authorization the president never obtained. Trump declared the ruling “ridiculous” and “anti-American,” and attacked majority justices personally, calling his own nominees Barrett and Gorsuch “an embarrassment to their families” and barely welcome at the upcoming State of the Union.
Internationally, trading partners expressed growing anxiety. Germany’s Chancellor Merz called the tariff upheaval economically toxic and announced a trip to Washington with a joint European stance. France’s President Macron defended judicial oversight and called for trade built on mutual fairness. The UK, previously holding a 10% rate, finds itself facing the new 15% baseline with no clear path forward.
About 90% of the more than $130 billion in tariffs collected under the old IEEPA regime has been paid by American businesses and consumers. Industry groups are pushing for refunds, but Trump indicated those would require a protracted legal fight. Exemptions apply to critical minerals, metals, pharmaceuticals, and USMCA-compliant goods from Canada and Mexico.
