Major U.S. companies largely sat out the Supreme Court tariff case, leaving small firms and trade groups to front a legal battle that could reshape presidential power over trade and consumers’ prices.
The U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments on November 5, 2025, over whether the International Emergency Economic Powers Act lets a president impose sweeping tariffs without explicit congressional approval. Lower courts have said most of Donald Trump’s tariffs exceeded that authority. Trump skipped the hearing; Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent attended, underscoring how central the policy is to the administration’s economic agenda. Justices pressed the government on whether “regulate importation” in the 1977 law truly includes taxing imports at scale, and whether such a move triggers the major-questions doctrine that demands clear authorization from Congress.
While associations such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce weighed in, No major U.S. companies filed briefs backing the challengers. Instead, the lead cases were brought by small businesses, including toy maker Learning Resources and New York-based importer V.O.S. Selections. Reporting indicates many large brands opted for quiet lobbying and sought exemptions rather than taking a public stand in a politically charged showdown—an unusual posture given how often blue-chip firms file amicus briefs in consequential Supreme Court cases.
At issue is not just tariff policy, but the balance of power: Congress historically levies taxes and duties, while presidents execute trade laws. The administration argues emergency powers allow flexible, rapid responses to economic threats; challengers say that reading would hand the White House open-ended tariff authority. By late September, the IEEPA-based tariffs had generated roughly $89 billion in collections, money paid by U.S. importers that can filter into consumer prices. About $89 billion has been collected so far, highlighting the real-world consequences of the Court’s decision.
A ruling could arrive faster than usual, given the policy’s breadth and immediate effects. Even if the justices curb IEEPA as a tariff tool, the administration has signaled it could pivot to other trade authorities, leaving narrower—but still significant—paths for duties. For now, businesses continue planning around legal uncertainty: small firms push their challenge in court, and larger ones keep to the sidelines, watching a case that could redefine how—and by whom—America’s tariffs are set.