Scott Bessent Reveals What He Expects From Supreme Court’s Ruling On Trump’s Power To Levy Tariffs

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told Fox News’s Maria Bartiromo on Sunday he feels confident the Supreme Court will decide to uphold President Donald Trump’s tariffs, noting the court does not usually rule to kneecap presidents’ “signature” policies.

The Supreme Court is set to decide a case involving Trump’s power to issue tariffs on foreign nations under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). Bartiromo asked the treasury secretary if the Trump administration had a “back-up plan” or if it would have to “pay back $200 billion in tariff revenue already collected” if the Court ruled against the president.

“I want to say this in the strongest possible terms: I think there are three points here. One, this is one of President Trump’s signature policies and traditionally the Supreme Court does not interfere with a president’s signature policy,” Bessent began.

“Two, this is an emergency authority which is IEEPA. President Trump has successfully used that,” he added. “On the rare earth problem he threatened substantial tariffs on China, and that made the rare earths flow.”

Bessent also told Bartiromo that Trump had repeatedly threatened to levy tariffs on goods made in countries with which he was in the process of negotiating peace deals, noting how the pressure of that economic tool “got us to the peace deal.”

“We had fentanyl tariffs. And what is more of an emergency than hundreds of thousands of Americans dying every year? No one had been able to get the Chinese to the table with these precursor drugs,” he pointed out.

“Three: I would push this back on to the Supreme Court. I don’t think this ruling is going to go against us, but if it does, what’s their plan for refunds? How is this going to get to consumers? Are they just going to hand some of these importers a big windfall?” Bessent continued. “What if the exporters had given big discounts already and then you’re going to give a refund on the tariffs? They’d be making it on both sides. So, I don’t think the Supreme Court wants to wade into a mess like that.”

During Nov. 5 oral arguments, the Court appeared inclined to rule against Trump’s tariff authority.

“Congress uses tariffs in other provisions, but not here,” said Chief Justice John Roberts, an appointee of President George W. Bush widely seen as a crucial swing vote. “And yet the justification is being used for a power to impose tariffs on any product, from any country, in any amount, for any length of time. That does seem like its major authority.”

“Why would a rational Congress say, ‘Yeah, we’re going to give the president the power to shut down trade … but can’t do a 1% tariff?’” asked Trump-appointed Justice Brett Kavanaugh, another potential swing vote, referring to the scope of the IEEPA.

The law, which President Jimmy Carter signed in 1977, gives the president broad authority to regulate international commerce after declaring a national emergency. IEEPA does not explicitly mention tariffs and no president has used it as a basis to levy them until Trump, who frequently invoked it during his second term in office.

During the 43-day government shutdown, the Senate passed a series of bipartisan resolutions to end three national emergencies Trump declared to justify his tariffs against Brazil and Canada, as well as his global reciprocal tariffs as a whole. In all of these instances, a group of four or five Republicans, including Kentucky Sens. Rand Paul and Mitch McConnell, joined the Senate Democratic Caucus to block the tariffs.