![\"Why](\"https:\/\/static.toiimg.com\/thumb\/msid-128631165,imgsize-1137438,width-400,resizemode-4\/pic-45.jpg\" "\\".\\"")
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/section>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<\/div>\nThe US Supreme Court on Friday struck down many tariffs imposed by Donald Trump, ruling that a key emergency law he relied on does not give presidents the authority to impose such duties. The 6\u20133 decision was a major defeat for Trump and a relatively rare instance of the court checking his efforts in a second term that has relied heavily on tariffs as economic and foreign policy leverage against both allies and adversaries.The majority coalition brought together Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, Neil Gorsuch, Amy Coney Barrett and Ketanji Brown Jackson. Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Brett Kavanaugh dissented.<\/p>\n \u2018Historic Embarrassment\u2019 For Trump; US Supreme Court Blocks Global Tariffs In Shock Ruling<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n At the center of the case was the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), a 1977 statute that allows the president to regulate imports to address national security, foreign policy or economic threats. Trump had invoked the law to justify sweeping tariffs on nearly every country, citing \u201clarge and persistent\u201d trade deficits and failures by China, Canada and Mexico to stem the flow of illicit fentanyl and other drugs into the United States. The court, however, concluded the law does not authorize tariffs.The ruling has wide economic and political implications. It raises the prospect that the administration may have to refund more than $100 billion in tariff revenue to importers and leaves unresolved how businesses or consumers affected by higher prices could be compensated. Trump reacted angrily and quickly moved to impose new tariffs under different laws, including the 1974 Trade Act, signaling the fight over presidential tariff powers is likely to continue.Also read | Nothing changes for India: Donald Trump’s big statement on trade deal<\/a>Trump also said the court decision would not affect the ongoing India\u2013US trade deal. Speaking after announcing a new 10% global tariff, he said the arrangement with India would remain unchanged and that New Delhi would continue paying tariffs while the United States would not.\u201cNothing changes, they’ll be paying tariffs, and we will not be paying tariffs. So, the deal with India is they pay tariffs. This is a reversal for what it used to be. I think Prime Minister Modi is a great gentleman, a great man, actually, but he was much smarter than the people that he was against in terms of the United States. He was ripping us off, India. So we made a deal with India, it’s a fair deal now, and we are not paying tariffs to them and they are paying tariffs. We did a little flip,” said Trump.<\/p>\n IEEPA authorises the president to \u201cregulate \u2026 importation\u201d to address unusual and extraordinary threats to national security, foreign policy or the economy. But the statute does not use the words tariff, duty, levy or tax, which the court said was significant.<\/p>\nWhy the court struck down Trump tariffs<\/h2>\n<\/div>\n
1. The emergency law does not mention tariffs
<\/h4>\n<\/p>\n2. No president had used IEEPA this way before
<\/h4>\n<\/p>\n