JD Vance calls Supreme Court ruling blocking Trump tariffs ‘lawlessness’

WASHINGTON, DC: Vice President JD Vance sharply criticized the US Supreme Court after it struck down President Donald Trump's sweeping tariff order. The ruling, issued in a 6-3 decision, curbed the administration’s use of emergency powers to reshape trade policy.

In a post on X, Vance described the judgment as “lawlessness” and argued that it would weaken the president’s ability to protect American industries and secure supply chains. The decision marks a significant setback for Trump’s trade strategy ahead of the 2026 political cycle.

JD Vance slams Supreme Court tariff ruling as ‘lawlessness’

The Supreme Court ruled that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act does not authorize a president to impose broad, sweeping tariffs under emergency powers. The majority opinion effectively blocked Trump’s attempt to rely on the statute to implement global tariff measures.

Reacting swiftly, JD Vance accused the Court of overstepping its authority. “Today, the Supreme Court decided that Congress, despite giving the president the ability to ‘regulate imports,’ didn’t actually mean it,” Vance wrote. “This is lawlessness from the Court, plain and simple.”

He argued that the ruling would make it more difficult for the administration to protect domestic manufacturing and maintain supply chain resiliency. Vance maintained that Trump still holds other legal avenues to pursue tariff actions and signaled that the White House would continue advancing its trade agenda.

Trump criticizes high court decision and vows new tariff action

President Donald Trump also expressed strong dissatisfaction with the ruling during a White House press briefing. He called the decision “deeply disappointing” and claimed, without offering evidence, that the Court had been influenced by foreign interests and political pressures.

“It’s my opinion that the Court has been swayed by foreign interests and a political movement that is far smaller than people would ever think,” Trump said. He further suggested that some justices ruled out of fear rather than legal reasoning.

Despite the setback, Trump argued that the decision clarified the boundaries of presidential trade authority. He said his administration would turn to other “methods, practices, statutes, and authorities” that he believes are stronger than the emergency powers now deemed off-limits.

Trump added that these alternative approaches could generate additional government revenue and stabilize economic conditions. The administration has not yet detailed the specific legal tools it plans to use next, but both Trump and Vance made clear that their broader trade priorities remain unchanged.