Supreme Court Does Not Issue Ruling on Trump’s Tariffs

January 15, 2026

The U.S. Supreme Court issued three decisions on Wednesday but did not decide the closely watched dispute over the legality of President Donald Trump‘s global tariffs.

Related: Insurance Industry Contemplates Knock-On Effect of Tariffs to Claims, Consumers Tariffs Will Negatively Affect Insurance Industry, Says AM Best APCIA: Tariffs to Hurt Families and Business Owners, Affect Affordability

The court did not announce the next date when it will issue rulings. It does not announce in advance which rulings will be released on a given date.

The challenge to Trump’s tariffs marks a major test of presidential powers as well as of the court’s willingness to check some of the Republican president’s far-reaching assertions of authority since he returned to office in January 2025. The outcome will impact the global economy.

During arguments in the case on November 5, conservative and liberal justices appeared to cast doubt on the legality of the tariffs, which Trump imposed by invoking a 1977 law meant for use during national emergencies. Trump’s administration is appealing rulings by lower courts that he overstepped his authority.

(Reporting by Andrew Chung; Editing by Will Dunham)

Was this article valuable?

Here are more articles you may enjoy.

Latest Comments

  • January 20, 2026 at 4:41 pm
    elitescholar says:
    I noticed you didn't refute the first two points I made, one of which directly relates the value of the dollar decreasing and investors selling off US assets at an alarming ra... read more
  • January 20, 2026 at 12:35 pm
    C W Cornell says:
    But every President before Trump going back decades has used tariffs. Were they all violating the Constitution? And GDP growth is expected to be over 4% in the first quarter, ... read more
  • January 20, 2026 at 11:36 am
    elitescholar says:
    the tariffs are unconstitutional and trump has proven over and over he doesn't understand the US Constitution. I believe the US is currently in a national emergency but that ... read more

Add a CommentSee All Comments (6)Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

More News
More News Features