Justice Thomas Sounds Off ON SCOTUS Tariff Ruling
The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday blocked President Donald Trump from using an emergency law to impose high tariffs on most U.S. trading partners without the consent of Congress. The president suffered a significant setback in a case concerning one of his primary economic policies, which he deemed crucial for the U.S. economy.
The justices ruled 6-3 that Trump’s tariffs were not valid. Justices Brett Kavanaugh, Samuel Alito, and Clarence Thomas disagreed.
Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas sounded off in his dissent.
“Neither the statutory text nor the Constitution provides a basis for ruling against the President. Congress authorized the President to ‘regulate . . . importation.’ Throughout American history, the authority to ‘regulate importation’ has been understood to include the authority to impose duties on imports,” Thomas declared.
“The meaning of that phrase was beyond doubt by the time that Congress enacted this statute, shortly after President Nixon’s highly publicized duties on imports were UPHELD based on identical language. The statute that the President relied on, therefore, authorized him to impose the duties on imports at issue in these cases,” Thomas added.
Thomas continued, “Because the Constitution assigns Congress many powers that do not implicate the nondelegation doctrine, Congress may delegate the exercise of many powers to the President. Congress has done so repeatedly since the founding, with this court’s blessing.”
In addition, George Washington University Law School professor and legal scholar Jonathan Turley said this isn’t over. The administration can still impose tariffs through other statutes.
“The administration has other tools in its toolbox. It can actually impose tariffs under other statutes,” Turley said, adding that there’s plenty of runway for the Trump White House in this area of economic policy.
Justice Brett Kavanaugh raised in a fiery dissent what he said would be “serious practical consequences” of the high court’s decision in terms of refunding illegitimately imposed tariffs. The majority did not address refunds, an issue now likely to be raised in lower courts.
“The United States may be required to refund billions of dollars to importers who paid the IEEPA tariffs, even though some importers may have already passed on costs to consumers or others,” Kavanaugh wrote. “As was acknowledged at oral argument, the refund process is likely to be a ‘mess.’”
Lawyers for the Trump administration have argued in lower courts that the IEEPA allows a president to act in response to “unusual and extraordinary threats” and in cases where a national emergency has been declared.
Trump says that deep and “sustained” trade deficits are a national emergency that is bad enough to let him use his emergency powers.
The DOJ asked the Supreme Court to keep the tariffs in place, saying that not giving Trump the power to set tariffs under IEEPA “would leave our country open to trade retaliation without effective defenses.”
Plaintiffs said that no president has ever used the law to impose tariffs in the 50 years since it was passed. They also said that the trade deficit Trump talked about has been going on for almost 50 years, which they said goes against his claim that there is an “unusual and extraordinary” trade emergency.
They said that letting Trump use IEEPA to keep his universal tariffs would give the executive branch a lot more power at the expense of the other branches of government.
Last year, all three judges on the U.S. Court of International Trade agreed to stop Trump’s tariffs from going into effect.
They said that as commander-in-chief, Trump does not have “unbounded authority” to impose tariffs under the emergency law.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit also rejected the administration’s use of IEEPA.
Breaking, PAM BONDI discloses that she has been diagnosed with…
____BY 118_____
Steve Yates discusses Pam Bondi's contributions after her removal as attorney general
Steve Yates, former deputy national security advisor for Vice President Cheney, reflects on Attorney General Pam Bondi's significant contributions, especially in fighting illicit fentanyl and advocating for victims.
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Former Attorney General Pam Bondi was diagnosed with thyroid cancer shortly after departing the Department of Justice last month, according to a report.
Bondi, 60, who left her role at the Justice Department in early April, underwent treatment and is recovering, a source told Axios.
Katie Miller, a former White House staffer and podcast host who is married to White House deputy chief of staff for policy Stephen Miller, reposted the report on X on Tuesday.
"Pam has been quietly kicking cancer's ass the last few weeks," she wrote.
PAM BONDI CANCELS APPEARANCE AT ANTI-TRAFFICKING SUMMIT OVER MEDICAL ISSUE
Attorney General Pam Bondi takes her seat before testifying at a House Judiciary Committee hearing on oversight of the Department of Justice on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., on Feb. 11, 2026. (Roberto Schmidt/AFP)
She added that Bondi has "a heart of gold."
Axios disclosed the health update while reporting that Bondi has been appointed by President Donald Trump to an advisory committee focused on artificial intelligence policy.
The White House confirmed to Fox News Digital that Bondi will serve on the Presidential Council of Advisors on Science and Technology.
"Pam has been an enormously valuable asset to the president's team, and I'm thrilled for her and for all of us that she's going to remain involved in confronting some of the most important issues the administration faces," Vice President JD Vance said in a statement.
AG PAM BONDI SUGGESTS TRUMP'S CRIME CRACKDOWN IN DC WILL HELP LATINO RESIDENTS
U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi testifies before the Senate Judiciary Committee in the Hart Senate Office Building on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., on Oct. 7, 2025. (Win McNamee/Getty Images)
The council is co-chaired by White House AI and crypto czar David Sacks and White House science advisor Michael Kratsios.
Bondi will reportedly help facilitate coordination between the federal government and technology executives serving on the panel.
News of Bondi’s diagnosis and new advisory role comes weeks after Trump removed her as attorney general.
KARL ROVE: TRUMP DROPPED BONDI, BUT THE REAL POLITICAL FIGHT IS JUST BEGINNING
Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche attends a news conference at the Justice Department in Washington, D.C., on Nov. 19, 2025. (Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)
In a Truth Social post announcing her departure, Trump described Bondi as "a Great American Patriot and a loyal friend."
"Pam did a tremendous job overseeing a massive crackdown in Crime across our Country, with Murders plummeting to their lowest level since 1900," Trump wrote. "We love Pam, and she will be transitioning to a much needed and important new job in the private sector, to be announced at a date in the near future."
Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche has served as acting attorney general since Bondi’s departure.
BLANCHE INVOKES TRUMP ‘LOVE’ WHEN ASKED ABOUT STAYING ON AFTER BONDI
U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi speaks as President Donald Trump looks on during a news conference in the Oval Office of the White House on Oct. 15, 2025, in Washington, D.C. (Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)
In a post on X confirming her exit from the Justice Department, Bondi said she remains "eternally grateful for the trust that President Trump placed in me to Make America Safe Again."
"Over the next month I will be working tirelessly to transition the office of Attorney General to the amazing Todd Blanche before moving to an important private sector role I am thrilled about, and where I will continue fighting for President Trump and this Administration," Bondi wrote.
"Leading President Trump’s historic and highly successful efforts to make America safer and more secure has been the honor of a lifetime, and easily the most consequential first year of the Department of Justice in American history."
Judge Tosses Wolff Suit, Clearing Path For $1B Melania Claim
Wolff filed suit against Trump seeking to block her from suing him for $1 billion for alleged defamatory claims he made regarding her association with Jeffrey Epstein.
“It’s an inappropriate level of tactical gamesmanship,” said Manhattan Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil, an appointee of President Donald Trump.
Vyskocil said she would not be “drafted to oversee an abusively presented spat,” yet she recognized that both sides have a “real dispute.”
Last year, the first lady’s lawyer issued Wolff a letter demanding he delete the statements he made about Trump and threatening that she would have “no alternative” but to sue him if he didn’t.
That spurred him to sue her in state court in October.
Trump’s lawyer, Alejandro Brito, had the complaint moved to federal court, where Vyskocil declared that while federal court does have jurisdiction, she was declining to exercise it and “dismisses this case to be litigated like any other.”
A Melania Trump spokesperson said that the first lady “is proud to continue standing up to, and fighting against, those who spread malicious and defamatory falsehoods as they desperately try to get undeserved attention and money from their unlawful conduct.”
The 56-year-old’s lawyer previously claimed that Wolff’s statements caused her “overwhelming reputational and financial harm.”
The first lady has denied any association with Epstein, who died in jail in 2019 while awaiting trial on charges of child sex trafficking.
“The lies linking me with the disgraceful Jeffrey Epstein need to end today,” the first lady said in an April press conference.
“The individuals lying about me are devoid of ethical standards, humility, and respect. I do not object to their ignorance, but rather I reject their mean-spirited attempts to defame my reputation,” she added at the time.
Wolff claimed in his lawsuit that the president and first lady “have made a practice of threatening those who speak against them” with costly legal actions “to silence their speech, to intimidate their critics generally, and to extract unjustified payments and North Korean-style confessions and apologies.”
He added that some of his statements were taken out of context and some were protected speech, including a statement he made that claimed the Trumps have a “sham marriage, trophy marriage,” that his lawsuit says was a “fair and justified” opinion.
It also said in his lawsuit that Wolff never accused the first lady of being involved with criminal activity associated with Epstein.
The Daily Beast retracted an article last summer, titled “Melania Trump ‘Very Involved’ in Epstein Scandal: Author,” which was based on an interview with Wolff, after the outlet received a letter from Brito.
In the interview that formed the basis for the retracted piece, Wolff said he reported that the first lady was “behind the scenes” dealing with the situation at the White House, but was not involved criminally.
Republican Rep. Nancy Mace praised Melania Trump at the time for coming out against Epstein.
“Melania Trump stands with Epstein victims,” Mace said, citing the first lady’s advocacy for legislation addressing the distribution of fake intimate images. “The truth will prevail.”
Democratic lawmakers also commented following the statement.
Rep. Robert Garcia called for a public hearing, writing, “We agree with First Lady Melania Trump’s call for a public hearing,” Garcia said. “We encourage Chairman Comer to schedule a hearing immediately.”
Garcia said the remarks renewed attention on the broader investigation.
In her remarks, Melania Trump called on Congress to take action.
“Now is the time for Congress to act,” she said.
She urged lawmakers to allow victims to testify under oath.
This article may contain commentary which reflects the author’s opinion.
