Why the Supreme Court might choose to uphold Trump’s tariffs: ‘It would be very disturbing to break up those eggs’

The issue that Challenges The sweeping tariffs Trump imposed under emergency powers have become a threat A decisive moment For business leaders navigating a volatile business landscape already reshaped by uncertainty, inflation and geopolitical competition.

As former Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar pointed out in… luckAt the Most Powerful Women Conference, the Supreme Court now faces a “difficult question” about whether it should hold up the sitting president’s signature economic policy after it has already reshaped the global trade landscape.

“Even if the tariffs had never been in effect, now that they have gone in and changed the status quo, the court may eventually pause and worry before disrupting the president’s economic policy in this way,” she said. luckMichel Lev Ram.

The potential economic fallout from reversing Trump’s tariff policy may ultimately tip the court’s hand. “The government comes to court and Saying“We will have to throw away billions or trillions of dollars. It could bankrupt our nation,” Prelogar added. “It would be incredibly annoying to try to scramble those eggs,” he said, referring to the billions of dollars already raised and distributed under the policy.

Definitional controversy

Trump’s move to impose reciprocal tariffs of 10% on all imports – rising to 50% for major trading partners – under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) marked one of the most aggressive uses of executive trade power in US history. Reportedly, his administration has since It raised $158 billion In definitions, He argues Hitting them would be “absolutely impossible to recover from” and would destabilize ongoing trade negotiations. Treasurer Scott Besent estimated If the Supreme Court disagrees with the administration, the United States “would have to refund about half of the tariffs, which would be terrible for the Treasury,” he said in an interview with NBC.

Lower courts disagreed, ruling that Trump exceeded his legal and constitutional limits. In three separate opinions, the federal justices concluded that the IEEPA does not allow the president to unilaterally impose what amounts to a huge tax on imports. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, in A 7-4 Decision“Absent a valid authorization from Congress, the President has no authority to impose taxes,” he said pointedly, stressing that tariffs — long considered a congressional authority — require clear legislative authorization.

If the court overturns the tariffs, companies could see immediate relief in import costs — but Economic multiplier effectIt will be complicated. Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget Estimates Eliminating the tariffs would wipe out $2.8 trillion in projected government revenue through 2035, which could force cuts or higher borrowing costs that could pressure companies elsewhere.

“Roughly toss a coin.”

Right now, American consumers and businesses are feeling the burden of tariffs the most, according to A a report By Goldman Sachs. The analysis estimated that American consumers bear up to 55% of the costs resulting from Trump’s tariffs, even though the president has repeatedly claimed that import tariffs impose exclusive taxes on foreign companies. Goldman’s research also found that US companies pay 22% of the cost of tariffs, while foreign exporters contribute only 18% of the cost.

While Wall Street may initially celebrate the easing of tariffs especially in hard-hit sectors, broader uncertainty over US trade policy may persist, especially since Trump has indicated that will pivot To other legal authorities, such as Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act, to reimpose tariffs on specific industries if the court does not rule in his favor.

Even if the law is on the side of the contenders, realistic concerns about economic and executive power, according to Prelogar, make the outcome of the case “more like a flip of a coin.” Trade and legal experts I expected earlier Between 70 and 80% say the Supreme Court will rule against the Trump administration and expect a decision by the end of the year. According to them, judges may not follow traditional ideological divisions.

Whether Trump’s tariffs persist or collapse, the only certain outcome is that the decision will redefine how executives plan in an era where law and economics collide. The court’s ruling, expected by the end of the year, will either restore trade powers to Congress, or confirm that the president’s emergency powers can reach deep into the heart of global trade.