President Trump’s decision to announce a 15% global tariff Saturday using a 1974 trade law provision carried an unmistakable message to Congress: he intends to continue his aggressive trade agenda with or without legislative support. The move came hours after the Supreme Court ruled that his previous approach required the very congressional authorization he has consistently bypassed.
Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, the provision Trump now relies upon, allows tariffs of up to 15% for 150 days before Congress must authorize continuation. Trump’s administration stated it would use that 150-day window to build a legally durable, longer-term tariff framework. Legal experts noted that the provision has never been tested in court and may itself attract legal challenges.
The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 Friday that Trump’s IEEPA-based tariffs were unconstitutional for lacking congressional approval. Rather than seek that approval, Trump immediately pivoted to a separate authority. He characterized the ruling as “ridiculous” and “extraordinarily anti-American,” attacked majority justices in unusually personal terms, and praised the three dissenters who supported his position.
World leaders urged a more collaborative and stable approach. Germany’s Chancellor Merz announced a planned trip to Washington with a unified European position, warning that the ongoing tariff volatility was toxic for economic confidence on both continents. France’s Macron reaffirmed the importance of judicial independence and reciprocal trade principles.
The UK faces fresh uncertainty after previously agreeing to a 10% rate that is now superseded by the new 15% baseline. Business groups worldwide warned of trade damage and economic slowdown. Approximately 90% of the $130 billion in tariffs collected under the now-invalidated IEEPA regime was paid by American businesses and consumers.