© 2025 Connecticut Public

FCC Public Inspection Files:
WEDH · WEDN · WEDW · WEDY
WEDW-FM · WNPR · WPKT · WRLI-FM
Public Files Contact · ATSC 3.0 FAQ
Play Live Radio
Next Up:
0:00
0:00
0:00 0:00
Available On Air Stations

Supreme Court justices appear skeptical of Trump's tariff arguments

The Supreme Court heard arguments Wednesday on the legality of the Trump administration's tariff policy.
Andrew Harnik
/
Getty Images
The Supreme Court heard arguments Wednesday on the legality of the Trump administration's tariff policy.

Supreme Court justices appeared skeptical Wednesday of the government's argument that President Trump could bypass Congress to impose tariffs on other countries by using national security as the legal rationale.

Both the court's six conservatives and its three liberals sharply questioned D. John Sauer, the solicitor general, on Trump's use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, known as IEEPA.

Lower courts have ruled that Trump exceeded his authority under both the statute and the Constitution.

But the president argues that both allow him to impose tariffs in order to deal with persistent trade imbalances and to stem the flood of fentanyl coming into the United States. Both, he asserts, present national emergencies and pose a threat to national security.

Sauer told the justices Wednesday that the tariffs put in place by Trump are "regulatory ... not revenue-raising tariffs."

"The fact that they raise revenue was only incidental," he said.

Neil Katyal, a lawyer for those challenging the government, began his argument by simply noting: "Tariffs are taxes."

Trump has repeatedly cited the amount of revenue tariffs have brought the federal government. They've brought in $195 billion this fiscal year, according to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, a fiscal watchdog group.

Trump, who has championed tariffs for decades, had made them the centerpiece of his re-election campaign. Almost immediately after taking office, he imposed a range of tariffs on a variety of countries, including the closest U.S. trade allies.

But the tariffs spooked American businesses, prompting a court challenge, contending that the president had exceeded his authority in imposing the tariffs.

A decision in the case is expected next year.

Copyright 2025 NPR

Nina Totenberg is NPR's award-winning legal affairs correspondent. Her reports air regularly on NPR's critically acclaimed newsmagazines All Things Considered, Morning Edition, and Weekend Edition.

Federal funding is gone.

Congress has eliminated all funding for public media.

That means $2.1 million per year that Connecticut Public relied on to deliver you news, information, and entertainment programs you enjoyed is gone.

The future of public media is in your hands.

All donations are appreciated, but we ask in this moment you consider starting a monthly gift as a Sustainer to help replace what’s been lost.

SOMOS CONNECTICUT is an initiative from Connecticut Public, the state’s local NPR and PBS station, to elevate Latino stories and expand programming that uplifts and informs our Latino communities. Visit CTPublic.org/latino for more stories and resources. For updates, sign up for the SOMOS CONNECTICUT newsletter at ctpublic.org/newsletters.

SOMOS CONNECTICUT es una iniciativa de Connecticut Public, la emisora local de NPR y PBS del estado, que busca elevar nuestras historias latinas y expandir programación que alza y informa nuestras comunidades latinas locales. Visita CTPublic.org/latino para más reportajes y recursos. Para noticias, suscríbase a nuestro boletín informativo en ctpublic.org/newsletters.

Federal funding is gone.

Congress has eliminated all funding for public media.

That means $2.1 million per year that Connecticut Public relied on to deliver you news, information, and entertainment programs you enjoyed is gone.

The future of public media is in your hands.

All donations are appreciated, but we ask in this moment you consider starting a monthly gift as a Sustainer to help replace what’s been lost.

Related Content