Some Republican lawmakers are expressing quiet approval of the Supreme Court’s decision to block most tariffs, despite it significantly undermining President Donald Trump’s foreign policy and economic approach.
A conservative House Republican mentioned feeling “relieved” about the ruling, particularly happy to speak anonymously. “That’s the right outcome,” they stated. “We’ve already started getting positive feedback from colleagues, and I expect that’ll continue. This ruling helps Congress retain its authority over tariffs and reinforces the separation of powers.”
Another Trump-supporting House Republican echoed this sentiment, saying, “The Supreme Court has made the correct call regarding Article I authority.”
Meanwhile, the No. 2 House Republican reflected on the general conservative view, stating that while tariffs were useful at times, they are ultimately “a tax on the consumer.”
The high court ruled that President Trump lacks the authority to impose tariffs using the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). This decision comes in light of the White House’s interpretation of a 1977 law, which was used for the sweeping “Emancipation Day” tariffs first introduced last year.
Chief Justice John Roberts suggested that if tariffs were intended to be within the president’s powers, the law would spell that out more clearly. “To justify his unusual claim of tariff authority, the president would need to show ‘clear Congressional approval,’ which he cannot do,” Roberts pointed out.
This isn’t the first instance of Republican dissent regarding Trump’s tariffs; previously, Senate votes have challenged aspects of this strategy, and just last week, the House voted to end Trump’s state of emergency with Canada regarding tariffs.
Rep. Don Bacon (R-Nebraska), who opposed the Canadian tariffs, emphasized, “Article I grants Congress the authority to impose tariffs. Beyond my constitutional worries about the administration’s broad tariffs, I also think they are misguided as economic policy. They’re generally bad for the economy.”
One House Republican aide bluntly stated after the ruling, “Tariffs are terrible and they don’t help.”
Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), a notable opponent of tariffs, argued online that “no future government—regardless of its ideology—should be able to use ’emergency’ powers to bypass Congress and impose taxes by decree.”
However, reactions among Republicans were mixed, with some not entirely pleased about the implications the ruling holds for Trump’s policies. One GOP official rated the feelings as “50-50” on whether the ruling brought relief or not. “If this is a relief for Republicans, it shows they don’t really care about the president’s policies,” they remarked.
This official also expressed confusion about why anyone would feel happy seeing Trump and the American populace potentially losing trillions of dollars.
Sen. Roger Marshall (R-Kansas) shared disappointment but not surprise over the verdict, acknowledging the court’s internal divisions on the matter. “Trump’s tariffs yielded results. They brought trading partners to negotiations, secured several trade deals, and even helped relocate supply chains and manufacturing to the U.S.,” he noted, adding that these tactics also benefitted national security, like urging India to cut Russian oil purchases.
Meanwhile, another anonymous House Republican called the Supreme Court ruling a “major setback,” believing that the tariffs were finally yielding fair trade progress.
