U.S. Supreme Court Rules Against Some Trump Tariffs, Auto Sector Still Looking for Relief

The U.S. Supreme Court has found against President Donald Trump, ruling that he did not have the authority to levy tariffs against numerous countries including Canada under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). Sector-specific tariffs against, among others, the automotive industry, are unaffected by the ruling.

The court ruled 6-3 against the president’s interpretation of the act. Trump’s argument was that the IEEPA gave his office independent power to impose import tariffs on any product, at any rate, for any amount of time. However, the court found that his interpretation was based on a faulty reading of the act.

That’s good news for a number of Canadian industries, but it’s not a complete victory in the trade was launched by the U.S. Separately, Trump used Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act to impose tariffs against specific sectors, including steel, aluminum, softwood lumber, and the automotive industry. As a result, this Supreme Court ruling does not affect those tariffs.

Still, there’s reason for positivity, according to Dominic LeBlanc, the minister of Canada-U.S. trade. In a post on X, he wrote that the ruling “reinforces Canada’s position that the IEEPA tariffs imposed by the United States are unjustified.”

LeBlanc granted that “critical work lies ahead to support Canadian businesses,” though. He added that as the first joint review of the Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement approaches, Canada is looking to strengthen growth and create opportunities with the U.S. while also working with reliable trade partners around the world.

While Candace Laing, the CEO of the Canadian Chamber of Commerce, echoed Minister LeBlanc’s approval of the U.S. Supreme Court ruling, in a written statement to the Toronto Star, she warned that the decision may also lead Trump to lash out.

“This is certainly not the last chapter of this never-ending story,” wrote Laing. “Canada should prepare for new, blunter mechanisms to be used to reassert trade pressure, potentially with broader and more disruptive effects.”