Tariffs

The park­ing lot of a Wal­mart gro­cery store. Con­sumer prices have been impact­ed by tar­iffs. The U.S. Supreme Court will decide if Pres­i­dent Trump’s tar­iffs are con­sti­tu­tion­al. Pho­to by Con­nor Sharp.

Arti­cle 1, Sec­tion 8 estab­lish­es that Con­gress can reg­u­late com­mer­cial activ­i­ty between the U.S. fed­er­al gov­ern­ment and for­eign nations, between each of the states — also known as inter­state com­merce — and between the fed­er­al gov­ern­ment and Native Amer­i­can tribes. This clause, and the Supreme Court’s many cas­es involv­ing it, allows Con­gress to also reg­u­late any­thing that can encour­age or restrain com­merce, includ­ing trans­porta­tion, TV sig­nals, air safe­ty and water­ways. 

The Con­sti­tu­tion does not give the pres­i­dent uni­lat­er­al author­i­ty to levy tar­iffs. Pres­i­dent Don­ald Trump has been using the Inter­na­tion­al Emer­gency Eco­nom­ic Pow­ers Act of 1977 to jus­ti­fy his wide-rang­ing tar­iffs, say­ing in an April 2, 2025 White House fact sheet that “for­eign trade and eco­nom­ic prac­tices have cre­at­ed a nation­al emer­gency.” 

Con­sti­tu­tion­al law experts such as Michael McConnell, direc­tor of the Con­sti­tu­tion­al Law Cen­ter and pro­fes­sor at Stan­ford Uni­ver­si­ty, say the scope of Trump’s tar­iffs are unprece­dent­ed and could be a vio­la­tion of the sep­a­ra­tion of pow­ers, and that the Eco­nom­ic Pow­ers Act pro­vides no author­i­ty for the pres­i­dent to imple­ment tax­es. 

“That act del­e­gates var­i­ous pow­ers to the pres­i­dent ‘to deal with any unusu­al and extra­or­di­nary threat’ to U.S. nation­al secu­ri­ty, for­eign pol­i­cy or econ­o­my,” McConnell wrote in an op-ed for The New York Times. “The statute makes no men­tion of tar­iffs or oth­er tax­es, and before Mr. Trump, no pres­i­dent ever inter­pret­ed it to include such a pow­er.” 

McConnell said that if the act is broad­ly inter­pret­ed to allow tar­iff pow­ers, it would “empow­er Mr. Trump and future pres­i­dents to take upon them­selves exten­sive pow­ers nev­er inten­tion­al­ly del­e­gat­ed by Con­gress. If the courts uphold the Trump tar­iffs, it will be a major step toward a pres­i­den­cy that does what­ev­er the pres­i­dent wish­es to do.” 

On Nov. 5, 2025, the Supreme Court heard oral argu­ments for Learn­ing Resources v. Trump, a case that would decide if the act gives the pres­i­dent the author­i­ty to levy tar­iffs. 

-by Mikay­la Bun­nell, UConn Jour­nal­ism

Posted in