Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent moved quickly Friday to respond to the Supreme Court’s ruling striking down key components of President Donald Trump’s tariff framework, rejecting what he described as premature celebration from political opponents and pledging to press forward using other legal authorities.
Speaking at the Economic Club of Dallas, Bessent addressed the 6-3 decision, which held that the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act did not authorize the president to impose the sweeping tariffs at issue.
“President Trump will always put our national security and Americans first and as I have said before the president has multiple tools in his toolbox,” Bessent said at the outset of his remarks.
He sought to clarify what the ruling did — and did not — accomplish.
“Let’s be clear about what today’s ruling was and what it wasn’t,” Bessent said. “Despite the misplaced gloating from Democrats, ill-informed media outlets, and the very people who gutted our industrial base, the court did not rule against President Trump’s tariffs. Six justices simply ruled that IEEPA authorities cannot be used to raise even $1 of revenue.”
The Supreme Court’s majority opinion concluded that tariff-setting authority during peacetime rests with Congress, marking a setback for one of the administration’s broadest assertions of executive power since Trump returned to office. The tariffs had originally targeted Mexico, Canada, and China before being expanded more globally, and were justified as a response to drug trafficking and trade imbalances.
Bessent made clear that the administration does not view the decision as the end of its trade strategy. Echoing the president’s earlier comments, he said the White House would rely on alternative statutes to maintain its tariff policies.
“We will invoke alternative legal authorities to replace the IEEPA tariffs,” Bessent said, specifically citing Sections 232 and 301 as potential avenues.
Section 232 allows tariffs on imports deemed to threaten national security, while Section 301 authorizes trade actions against countries found to engage in unfair trade practices. Bessent also referenced Section 122 authority as part of the administration’s strategy moving forward.
Signaling confidence, Bessent noted that he had not revised his prepared remarks following the Court’s decision.
“Noting that I had not changed a word of my speech post-ruling,” he said, Treasury estimates show that using Section 122 authority combined with potentially enhanced Section 232 and Section 301 tariffs would result in “virtually unchanged tariff revenue in 2026.”
In other words, according to Bessent, the administration believes it can preserve the financial and policy impact of the tariff regime even without relying on IEEPA.
The secretary’s comments underscore the administration’s determination to continue pursuing its trade agenda despite the legal setback. While the Court’s ruling narrowed one pathway, Bessent framed the outcome as a technical limitation rather than a wholesale rejection of the president’s approach.
With alternative statutory tools still available, the administration is signaling that its broader objective — reshaping trade relationships and protecting what it views as vital national interests — remains firmly in place.
