Supreme Court Rules Against Trump’s Use of Tariffs According to One Statute; He Counters Using Another Statute

Last week, in welcome news amongst most industry circles, particularly agricultural ones, the Supreme Court ruled in a 6-3 decision against President Trumps 10 percent tariff imposed last April on nearly every country in the world, as well as specific, higher tariffs on some of the top U.S. trading partners, including Canada, Mexico, China, the European Union, Japan and South Korea.  “With supply costs already at or near record highs, we strongly encourage the president to avoid using any other available authorities to impose tariffs on agricultural inputs that would further increase costs,” American Farm Bureau Federation President Zippy Duvall said in a statement.  The American Soybean Association (ASA), whose members were slammed last year by China’s monthslong boycott of U.S. soybeans, echoed Duvall’s plea.  “The case at the Supreme Court has been closely followed by soybean farmers who have seen the cost of inputs rise over the past year due to tariffs,” ASA President Scott Metzger said in a statement. “Because farmers are caught in a cost-price squeeze and ag input costs remain high, we urge the President to refrain from imposing tariffs on agricultural inputs using other authorities.”

Unfortunately, Trump moved after the Supreme Court decision to impose a global tariff rate of 15 percent, invoking Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974. That provision allows the president to impose tariffs of up to 15 percent for 150 days.