High court weighs scope of presidential power

The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday began hearing a closely watched challenge to President Donald Trump’s second-term emergency tariffs, a case that will determine how far the White House can go in unilaterally rewriting trade rules. Business groups and several U.S. importers told the justices that Trump overreached when he used emergency economic powers—typically reserved for national security threats—to impose broad duties on Chinese and other imports. They argued that Congress never meant to hand presidents an open-ended tool that can raise costs for manufacturers, retailers and consumers with little oversight. Government lawyers countered that Congress has repeatedly expanded the president’s latitude on trade, especially when Washington wants leverage over rival powers, and said striking down the tariffs would weaken U.S. negotiating clout.

Economic stakes and political backdrop

The hearing comes at a tense moment in Washington: the federal shutdown has already dragged on for more than a month, and the administration has tied a possible rollback in tariffs to wider budget talks, linking two issues that usually move separately. Several justices pressed both sides on how to draw a line between legitimate national security concerns and purely economic ones, noting that future presidents could cite “emergencies” to tax almost any foreign product. Trade groups say their members face millions of dollars in extra costs this year alone and have already begun shifting supply chains away from China—moves they say will be hard to reverse regardless of how the court rules. A decision is expected next year, but even agreeing to hear the case signals that this Supreme Court, now regularly asked to review Trump-era policies, intends to put clearer guardrails on executive economic powers.