Scott Bessent, Treasury Secretary under Donald Trump, affirmed during a recent interview on Sunday Morning Futures With Maria Bartiromo that he expects the Supreme Court of the United States to uphold the administration’s tariff authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). He argued the Court typically avoids overturning a president’s “signature policy.”
Bessent described three key points in his defence: first, that the tariffs represent one of President Trump’s hallmark policies; second, that the emergency powers of IEEPA have precedent in national security or economic urgency cases; and third, that a ruling against the administration could trigger complex refund obligations and unintended windfalls for importers and exporters. He questioned whether the Court would “want to wade into a mess like that.”
The legal stakes are high. During oral arguments on Nov. 5, the Court signalled serious concerns over the scope of the administration’s tariff authority under IEEPA. Chief Justice John Roberts questioned whether Congress would truly grant the president power to impose “tariffs on any product, from any country, in any amount, for any length of time.”
If the Court rules the tariffs illegal, the federal government may face massive refund liabilities. Analysts suggest tens or even hundreds of billions could be at risk—though questions remain about the mechanics of reimbursement and whether the Court will require full or limited refunds.
As the decision looms, the case underscores the balance of power between the executive branch and Congress in trade and emergency powers. The outcome may reshape how future administrations deploy economic tools in national security and trade policy.
