Justice Brett Kavanaugh dissented on Friday regarding the Supreme Court's ruling that struck down President Donald Trump's "Liberation Day" tariffs. Kavanaugh contended that, despite the Court's decision, Trump could still maintain most of these tariffs through other federal statutes beyond the International Economic Emergency Powers Act (IEEPA), which the Court found inadequate for imposing such tariffs.
In his dissent, Kavanaugh highlighted alternative legislative frameworks, specifically the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, the Trade Act of 1974, and the Tariff Act of 1930, which could justify the tariffs Trump sought to impose with potentially different procedural requirements than those established by IEEPA. He suggested that the Court's ruling might not significantly limit a President's ability to impose tariffs in the future.
Kavanaugh's views align with those of Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, who previously indicated that the Trade Expansion Act could be used to replicate Trump's tariff structure despite the Court's decision. The Justice referenced historical precedents, including tariffs imposed by former President Richard Nixon during an economic crisis, to support his argument that tariffs are a traditional regulatory tool.
Additionally, Kavanaugh raised concerns about the implications of the ruling, suggesting it could necessitate refunds for tariffs already collected and potentially impact trade agreements negotiated under the affected tariffs. Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito supported Kavanaugh's dissent, with Thomas adding a separate opinion emphasizing that Congress had granted tariff authority to the president.