According to CNBC, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent revealed the Trump administration has multiple backup options for imposing tariffs if the Supreme Court rules against their current authority. The high court is hearing arguments Wednesday about whether President Trump exceeded his powers under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act when enacting sweeping duties. Bessent specifically mentioned Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 and Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 as alternative authorities, though he called IEEPA “by far the cleanest” option. The secretary expressed confidence the administration would prevail, noting the court has traditionally been “loath to interfere with signature policies.” Meanwhile, Bessent described the relationship with China as “in a good place” following last week’s Trump-Xi meeting that resulted in rolling back some tariffs, with two state visits planned for 2026.
What’s Really at Stake Here
This isn’t just about some legal technicality – it’s about presidential power. Basically, the Supreme Court case could determine how much authority future presidents have to use tariffs as economic weapons. And that’s a big deal. The administration has been using IEEPA, which gives them pretty broad emergency powers, but if that gets struck down, they’d have to fall back on more specific authorities like Section 232 (national security) or Section 301 (unfair trade practices).
Here’s the thing: those alternatives are way more cumbersome. They require more justification, more process, more everything. IEEPA lets the president move fast and make big threats during negotiations. Take that away, and suddenly the U.S. loses a lot of its leverage in trade talks. That’s why Bessent is being so vocal about having backup plans – he’s trying to signal that even if they lose this case, the tariff pressure isn’t going away.
The China Angle Everyone’s Watching
It’s pretty interesting timing that Bessent is talking up the improved relationship with China right as this court case heats up. He claims Trump is “the only leader who President Xi respects,” which, okay, that’s quite a statement. But look at what’s actually happening – they just rolled back some tariffs after that meeting in South Korea, and now there are state visits planned for 2026.
So what’s the real game here? Is the administration trying to show they can play nice with China while still keeping their tariff weapons ready? Or are they preparing for a scenario where they lose their favorite legal tool and need to rely more on diplomacy? Honestly, it feels like they’re covering all their bases. The court case could go either way, and they don’t want China thinking they’re about to lose all their leverage.
Why This Matters Beyond Trump
Think about this for a second: whoever wins in November inherits whatever power structure the Supreme Court decides on. If the court upholds broad presidential authority under IEEPA, the next president – whether it’s Trump or someone else – gets to keep that powerful trade weapon. If they strike it down, the next administration has to work with more limited tools.
And that’s the real long-term significance here. This isn’t just about current tariffs – it’s about how much power the executive branch will have over trade policy for years to come. The fact that Bessent is already talking about alternative authorities suggests the administration knows this could go badly for them. But they’re determined to keep the pressure on trading partners one way or another.
