(Washington) Supreme Court judges on Wednesday questioned the legality of the customs duties put in place by President Donald Trump in a case likely to shake a pillar of his economic and diplomatic policy.
The hearing is being held just a year after the election which allowed the Republican to return to the White House, from where he launched an unprecedented protectionist offensive, with customs duties.
These taxes on imported products generate billions of dollars in revenue and have made it possible to extract investment promises and more favorable conditions for American exporters from the United States’ partners.
The government does not want to see this building collapse and is urging the nine judges of the Supreme Court, six conservatives and three progressives, to maintain them.
The Court’s decision may not be rendered for several months, or, conversely, be rendered relatively quickly.
On behalf of the executive, legal counsel John Sauer rolled out his arguments at full speed.
In particular, he argued that rolling back the tariffs would “expose us to ruthless trade retaliation” from other countries and “tilt the United States from power to failure, with catastrophic consequences for the economy and national security.”
Several judges expressed skepticism, noting that the emergency law (IEEPA) invoked by the government does not mention the power to impose customs duties, only that of “regulating imports and exports”.
“Taxation is a matter for the legislative power (…) customs duties are taxes,” declared progressive judge Sonia Sotomayor.
The IEEPA text “is used to impose customs duties regardless of the product, the country of origin, by choosing the amount and duration,” said conservative judge John Roberts, noting that this seemed to confer “major authority” to the president.
Before the file reached the hands of the Supreme Court, several federal jurisdictions declared illegal the customs duties concerned – distinct from those affecting specific sectors, such as automobiles or steel.
The surcharges nevertheless remained in force pending a decision by the country’s highest court.
The government stands up
Donald Trump said Tuesday that maintaining these customs duties was a “matter OF LIFE AND DEATH for our country.”
“Otherwise, we will be virtually defenseless against other countries that have taken advantage of us for years,” he said on his Truth Social network.
He dispatched top officials to the courtroom.
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Trade Representative (attached to the White House) Jamieson Greer were to be present.
PHOTO HASNOOR HUSSAIN, REUTERS ARCHIVES
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent
Donald Trump has for months described customs duties, “one of the most beautiful words in the dictionary” according to him, as a Swiss army knife.
He prides himself on being able to reindustrialize the country, reduce its chronic trade deficit, negotiate from a position of strength with other countries, but also, by imposing taxes against Mexico, Canada and China, curb the fentanyl crisis, a powerful opiate which kills tens of thousands of Americans by overdose each year.
The Republican president invoked the IEEPA economic emergency law of 1977 to decree several rounds of customs duties. He then made them evolve over the course of negotiations or quarrels with other countries.
Small-scale entrepreneurs and Democratic states took the case to court, believing that the president could not encroach on the prerogatives of Congress to impose taxes that affect the lives of businesses and American consumers.
“In recent years, the Court has been reluctant to overturn presidential decisions of this magnitude,” ING analysts point out in a note on Wednesday.
However, they consider that the fate of the customs duties is difficult to predict, because their maintenance “would modify the balance of powers between Congress and the president, further strengthening the executive branch”.
