Trump Moves to Impose Broad Tariffs After Supreme Court Trade Ruling

The United States Supreme Court has ruled that the import tariffs imposed on foreign wines in recent years exceeded presidential authority, providing a temporary reprieve for the global wine industry. In a 6-3 decision in Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump, the court found that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977 did not grant the president broad powers to impose sweeping tariffs without explicit approval from Congress. This decision ends levies ranging from 15% to 25% that have affected international wine trade since last year.

The tariffs were part of a broader set of measures introduced under the IEEPA, which the court determined had been used beyond its intended limits. The ruling clarifies that emergency powers cannot be used to implement wide-ranging trade restrictions without congressional oversight.

President Donald Trump responded quickly to the court’s decision. Within hours, he announced plans to introduce new tariffs under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, a provision that has not previously been used for such broad measures. Trump stated that a 10% levy would be placed on all goods entering the United States, with plans to increase this rate to 15%, which is the maximum allowed under Section 122. The original 10% tariff was scheduled to take effect on February 24, but it is unclear if the revised 15% rate will be implemented on that date.

Section 122 allows these tariffs to remain in place for about five months before requiring congressional approval. This move signals that while the wine industry has gained short-term relief from the Supreme Court’s decision, new trade barriers may soon replace those just struck down.

The Wine and Spirits Wholesalers of America welcomed the Supreme Court’s ruling, emphasizing its importance for restoring clarity and predictability in trade policy. In a statement released on February 20, the organization said the decision reaffirms Congress’s central role in shaping trade policy and provides much-needed certainty for wholesalers, restaurants, bars, retailers, and consumers. Francis Creighton, president and chief executive of the association, noted that stability is essential for an industry dependent on open markets and international partnerships.

According to the association, previous tariffs included a base rate of 10% on most imports and higher rates for certain countries. These measures acted as direct taxes on American businesses and consumers, raising costs throughout the supply chain and putting additional pressure on hospitality operators. Many affected products are tied to specific geographic origins and cannot be replicated domestically.

Fine wine investors also reacted positively to the court’s decision. Alexander Westgarth, founder and chief executive of WineCap, called it a landmark victory for the global wine industry. He said that removing these tariffs eliminates arbitrary barriers that distorted market values and burdened collectors and investors. Westgarth expects an immediate increase in cross-border trade as costs decrease, which could restore liquidity in secondary markets if new tariffs are not applied to wine imports.

Despite this legal victory for American exporters, challenges remain abroad. The Wine Institute highlighted an ongoing ban on US wines in parts of Canada, which began on March 4, 2025, as a response to previous tariff disputes. Before this ban, Canada accounted for 36% of all US wine exports, valued at $459.5 million annually. Steve Gross, interim president and chief executive of the Wine Institute, stressed that predictable trade policy is crucial for small businesses and agricultural exporters. He urged the administration to resolve the Canadian ban and restore access to what remains America’s largest export market for wine.

As legal battles over trade authority continue in Washington and new tariffs loom on the horizon, uncertainty persists for both American producers and international partners in the wine sector. The Supreme Court’s decision marks a significant moment in defining executive power over trade but leaves open questions about future policy directions as political leaders seek new ways to regulate imports.