The US Supreme Court has delayed a decision on the legality of President Donald Trump’s global tariffs, a case that could redefine the limits of presidential power and reshape US trade policy.
The US Supreme Court did not issue any ruling regarding the highly anticipated case challenging the legality of President Donald Trump’s global tariff measures on 20 January 2026.
The justices also did not indicate when they will next issue decisions, as the court does not provide advance notice about the timing or content of its rulings.
Earlier, the US Supreme Court was expected to deliver its decisions on 14 January 2026 regarding the legality of Trump’s global tariff policy, but that was delayed to 20 January.
The tariffs dispute is regarded as a major test of presidential power and of the Supreme Court’s willingness to curb executive authority following Donald Trump’s return to the White House in January 2025.
The outcome could have significant implications not only for the balance of power between the president and Congress but also for global trade and economic relations.
During oral arguments in November, justices from both conservative and liberal camps expressed doubts about the administration’s legal basis for the tariffs, which were imposed using a 1977 law designed for national emergencies. Lower courts have already concluded that Trump overstepped his authority, prompting his administration to appeal those rulings.
In a key development, a federal appeals court ruled on 29 August 2025 that most of the tariffs were unlawful, though it allowed them to remain temporarily in effect until 14 October to give the Supreme Court time to consider an appeal. Trump has continued to defend the measures, claiming they have bolstered the US economy and warning that overturning them would be damaging to the country.
The administration relied on the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to justify broad “reciprocal” tariffs on imports from major trading partners, citing trade deficits as a national emergency.
The same law was also used to impose tariffs on China, Canada, and Mexico, linking them to concerns over fentanyl and other illegal drugs. The legal challenges were filed by affected businesses and a group of 12 states, most led by Democratic governors, highlighting the broad political and economic stakes of the case.
