Undang-undang mana yang menurut Mahkamah tidak bisa dijadikan dasar tarif tersebut?

The Court ruled that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, a law originally written to let presidents impose sanctions during declared national emergencies, does not actually grant the authority to impose broad tariffs on imports. Because the administration had relied on IEEPA as the legal basis for a wide set of tariffs, the ruling effectively voided that particular authority, leaving only narrower, separately authorized tariffs, like those under Section 232, still in place.

The Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act is a historical 1930s law associated with raising tariffs and worsening the Great Depression, not something invoked in this 2026 case, and the Sherman Antitrust Act deals with preventing monopolies and unfair competition, an entirely different area of law unrelated to tariffs.

The ruling reportedly triggered obligations to refund an enormous amount, roughly $166 billion, in tariffs already collected from businesses, showing how a single legal interpretation can ripple through the economy long after the policy was first enacted.