US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer: President Donald Trump’s tariff-policy defeat in the US Supreme Court won’t unravel individual deals the adm...
TL;DR
U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer states that the Supreme Court's invalidation of Trump's IEEPA-based tariffs does not affect existing trade deals. The administration is using other legal authorities to impose new tariffs and maintain its trade objectives, though legal and economic uncertainties persist.
US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer: President Donald Trump’s tariff-policy defeat in the US Supreme Court won’t unravel individual deals the administration has sealed with its trading partners
US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer: Trump’s Tariff-Policy Defeat in Supreme Court Won’t Unravel Trade Deals
The U.S. Supreme Court’s invalidation of President Donald Trump’s use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose broad tariffs has not derailed trade agreements negotiated by the administration, according to U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer. In a statement, Greer emphasized that the ruling “affects one element” of the administration’s trade strategy but affirmed that negotiated deals with key partners remain intact.
Following the February 20 ruling, Trump swiftly announced new tariffs under alternative legal authorities, including Section 122 of the 1974 Trade Act, which allows tariffs to address trade deficits. Greer noted that these measures, alongside ongoing Section 232 and Section 301 investigations, will sustain the administration’s objectives of reducing the trade deficit and addressing unfair practices by trading partners according to U.S. Trade Representative statements. Existing tariffs on steel, aluminum, and other sectors under Section 232, as well as China-related duties under Section 301, remain unaffected by the court’s decision.
The administration has also signaled its intent to maintain trade agreements secured in 2025, including deals with Japan, South Korea, and Southeast Asian nations. These agreements, which often paired tariff reductions with commitments to U.S. investments or market-opening measures, are not contingent on IEEPA-based duties. Greer highlighted that partners have engaged in “good-faith negotiations” and expressed confidence that agreements will “remain in effect”.
Economic analyses suggest the court’s ruling will lower the average effective tariff rate from 16.9% to 9.1%, though Trump’s new 10% across-the-board tariff under Section 122 will partially offset this decline according to Yale Budget Lab research. The Yale Budget Lab estimates that remaining tariffs will raise approximately $1.2 trillion over 10 years, though slower economic growth may reduce net revenue. Meanwhile, businesses face uncertainty over refunds for IEEPA tariffs, with potential legal battles complicating the process.
While the ruling curtails Trump’s broadest tariff powers, the administration’s reliance on sector-specific and reciprocal measures ensures continuity in its trade agenda. However, legal challenges to these new actions—and their economic impacts—remain possible, underscoring the ongoing volatility in U.S. trade policy.
