WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court struck down President Donald Trump's far-reaching global tariffs on Friday, handing him a significant loss on an issue crucial to his economic agenda.
The 6-3 decision centers on tariffs imposed under an emergency powers law, including the sweeping “reciprocal” tariffs he levied on nearly every other country.
It's the first major piece of Trump's broad agenda to come squarely before the nation's highest court, which he helped shape with the appointments of three conservative jurists in his first term.
The majority found that it's unconstitutional for the president to unilaterally set and change tariffs because taxation power clearly belongs to Congress.
“The Framers did not vest any part of the taxing power in the Executive Branch,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote. Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas and Brett Kavanaugh dissented.
Trump lashes out
Trump lashed out at the Supreme Court for striking down much of his sweeping tariff infrastructure as an illegal use of emergency power. Trump said he was “absolutely ashamed” of justices who voted to strike down his tariffs and called the ruling “deeply disappointing.”
“Their decision is incorrect,” he said. “But it doesn’t matter because we have very powerful alternatives.” Trump said he will impose a global 10% tariff as an alternative while pressing his trade policies by other means.
The court majority did not address whether companies could get refunded for the billions they have collectively paid in tariffs. Many companies, including the big-box warehouse chain Costco, have already lined up in lower courts to demand refunds. Kavanaugh noted the process could be complicated.
The Treasury had collected more than $133 billion from the import taxes the president has imposed under the emergency powers law as of December, federal data shows. The impact over the next decade was estimated at some $3 trillion.
Still, the decision is a “complete and total victory" for the challengers, said Neal Katyal, who argued the case on behalf of a group of small businesses.
“It’s a reaffirmation of our deepest constitutional values and the idea that Congress, not any one man, controls the power to tax the American people,” he said.
Colorado’s delegation reacts
Colorado’s Democratic lawmakers all applauded the decision. Sen. Diana DeGette called it a “huge win for American families, businesses and the rule of law,” on social media.
In a statement, Rep. Jason Crow said the tariffs were illegal and unconstitutional.
“Donald Trump’s tariffs are a tax on every American. They’ve raised costs on Colorado families, threatened small businesses, and hit working Americans the hardest,” Crow said.
Republican Rep. Jeff Hurd said that the court’s clarification, and said on social media that Congress needs to play it’s proper role in trade policy.
“I have heard directly from manufacturers, agricultural producers, and energy businesses in Colorado’s Third District about the uncertainty these tariffs have created,” Hurd said.
Sen. John Hickenlooper took it a step further.
“The Trump administration should immediately pay back every single Colorado small business that suffered from their reckless tariffs. If they don’t, we need to pass our bill to make them do exactly that,” he said.
Local businesses
Uncertainty has been the default setting for many businesses in Colorado. The court’s decision hasn’t changed that.
Colorado small businesses are awaiting clarity on how the ruling will affect them. Some don't expect it to help all that much.
“For now lot’s of confusion,” said the owner of St. Killian’s Cheese Shop in Denver, Jon Marsh. He said he wasn’t sure when the change would affect retailers, or if it would at all.
“If importers and distributors get refunded past tariffs or even for future orders IF they are not tariffed it’s unlikely this savings will get passed down to us, so we could possibly be stuck with the effects long term,” Marsh said.
For the state's brewers, the 50% tariff on aluminum is the biggest pain point, according to Casey LeFever, chief operating officer at 4 Noses Brewing in Broomfield. Those tariffs aren't affected by Friday's ruling because they are levied using a statute that wasn't part of the lawsuit over the executive branch's emergency powers.
“I'm just a brew manager, not an economist here, or a Supreme Court judge, or a Congress person or any of those things,” LeFever said. “But my understanding is that … today nothing changes.”
He said he was still absorbing the news Friday afternoon, trying to read the decision and understand the implications.
“It's tough,” LeFever said. “It's never thought I'd be a part-time tariff hobbyist or constantly reading the ins and outs of our global trade networks, however, that is the reality.”
Global implications
It wasn’t immediately clear how the decision restricting Trump’s power to unilaterally set and change tariffs might affect trade deals with other countries.
“We remain in close contact with the U.S. Administration as we seek clarity on the steps they intend to take in response to this ruling,” European Commission spokesman Olof Gill said, adding that the body would keep pushing for lower tariffs.
The Colorado Chamber of Commerce a statement from its President and CEO Loren Furman following the decision.
“Many of our members across various sectors experienced significant impacts to their operations due to the tariffs imposed last year, from supply chain disruptions to increased overhead costs and overall uncertainty about the future," said Furman. "We’re hopeful that this decision will bring stability to the market and reduce costs across the board for Colorado employers and families at a time when our state is already one of the most expensive places to live and do business. The Chamber remains focused on ensuring Colorado businesses can operate with predictability across all levels of government.”
Legal opposition crossed aisles
The Republican president has been vocal about the case, calling it one of the most important in U.S. history and saying a ruling against him would be an economic body blow to the country. But legal opposition crossed the political spectrum, including libertarian and pro-business groups that are typically aligned with the GOP. Polling has found tariffs aren't broadly popular with the public, amid wider voter concern about affordability.
While the Constitution gives Congress the power to levy tariffs, the Trump administration argued that a 1977 law allowing the president to regulate importation during emergencies also allows him to set import duties. Other presidents have used the law dozens of times, often to impose sanctions, but Trump was the first president to invoke it for import taxes.
“And the fact that no President has ever found such power in IEEPA is strong evidence that it does not exist,” Roberts wrote, using an acronym for the International Emergency Economic Powers Act.
Trump set what he called "reciprocal" tariffs on most countries in April 2025 to address trade deficits that he declared a national emergency. Those came after he imposed duties on Canada, China and Mexico, ostensibly to address a drug trafficking emergency.
A series of lawsuits followed, including a case from a dozen largely Democratic-leaning states — Colorado included — and others from small businesses selling everything from plumbing supplies to educational toys to women’s cycling apparel.
CPR reporters Sarah Mulholland and Caitlyn Kim contributed to this report.
