As the Supreme Court prepares to consider one of the most important economic cases in decades – the legality of President Donald Trump’s sweeping new tariffs – one of the original architects of his trade agenda says the president has gone too far to turn back.
Wilbur Ross, who served as the president’s commerce secretary from 2017 to 2021 and helped engineer Trump’s first wave of steel and aluminum tariffs during his first term, told reporters wealth A total Supreme Court defeat is unlikely. But even if it comes, Trump won’t go away.
“He’s too committed to tariffs to give up,” Ross said. “If they lose, I don’t think he’s going to just say, ‘Well, under this law, this doesn’t work and I’m going to give up.'” He’s too involved. “
Weaker case – bigger gamble
The Supreme Court will hear arguments on Wednesday over whether Trump overstepped his authority by using emergency powers to impose tariffs on more than 100 countries and nearly all U.S. trading partners. Technically speaking, according to Article 1, Section 8 of the ConstitutionCongress, not the President, has the authority to establish and impose “taxes, duties, import duties, and excise duties.” Tariffs, as an obligation, are subject to congressional approval. However, in addition to this, the Trump administration has also invoked international emergency economic powers Behavior The 1977 IEEPA allows the president to take regulatory action and impose tariffs during “national emergencies,” although the act makes no mention of tariffs.
This isn’t the first time Trump has found legal workarounds for unilateral action on trade: In 2018, Ross helped Trump craft a waiver under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act to trigger first round of tariffs About China and other countries. Ross said his team then held public hearings, consulted with industry and trade partners and built a lengthy administrative record to prepare for the court challenge.
“We had support from start to finish,” he recalls. “This provides a better definition of what government can do.”
However, Ross noted that this time around, the administration “hasn’t done much” with the same administrative procedures, meaning the Trump team’s case for going to court is weaker than before.
“They’re anxious to get things going,” he said. “It’s a greater risk.”
The stakes are huge. Trump used emergency decree to impose tariffs on goods from every hemisphere, Disrupt the market Generated approximately $195 billion in revenue for the government over several months according to Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB). The lawsuit, filed in the Supreme Court by importers and small manufacturers, claims the president’s broad use of emergency powers violates Congress’ authority to tax and regulate trade.
Trump’s lawyer debate IEEPA’s broad language allows the president to “regulate” commerce during “unusual and unusual threats,” giving him broad discretion to act. his critics counterCalling a trade deficit an “emergency” changes the meaning of the regulation beyond recognition.
Ross calls the case unpredictable but doesn’t expect the court to overturn the entire plan. He warned that removing all tariffs would trigger global unrest.
“This would be a very scary decision,” he said, adding that it would force people to ask some tough questions Who will get the reward?: Importers, consumers or companies passing costs onto the supply chain.
He said he thinks judges are more likely to “cherry-pick” some tariffs that appear to be politically motivated while leaving the rest of the system intact. As an example of tariffs he believes could be eliminated, he pointed to the 40% tariff Brazilian import tariffsTrump imposed a 10% tax for suing former President Jair Bolsonaro.
“No matter how bad the prosecution of Bolsonaro is,” Ross said, “it’s hard to imagine that this constitutes an emergency for the United States.”
The former commerce secretary also said he believed tariffs on personal groceries such as “broomsticks” or household items were unlikely to meet the standards set by IEEPA. However, he said other cases constituted national emergencies, such as Trump’s tariffs on Mexico, China and Canada Stop the flow of fentanyl in the united states
Markets fear uncertainty more than fear of failure
Ross said even if the courts narrow Trump’s powers, the president is unlikely to abandon the tariffs entirely.
“He’s so loyal,” he said again.
Instead, Trump could seek new legal justification for his actions or push Congress to codify the measures. He noted that union support for protectionist policies blurs traditional party lines, but in the current political climate, Democrats may be more inclined to against trump rather than defend their traditional pro-labor stance.
Ross, known in business circles as the “King of Bankruptcy” for his work restructuring troubled industries before joining the administration, sees the current fight as a familiar risk-reward game. The danger, he said, was not only losing the case but also creating uncertainty for companies that rely on predictable trade rules.
“Markets can adjust to good news or bad news,” he said. “The trouble with markets is uncertainty.”