Trump says US Supreme Court ruling expanded his tariff powers, allows ‘powerful, obnoxious’ use of duties

US President Donald Trump on Monday claimed that a recent ruling by the US Supreme Court had “accidentally and unwittingly” expanded his authority to impose and use tariffs more forcefully, saying the decision gave him “far more powers and strength” than he previously had.

In a post on Truth Social, Trump said the court’s opinion effectively approved his use of tariffs and provided greater legal certainty for deploying them in what he described as a more “powerful and obnoxious” manner against foreign countries.

“The court has also approved all other Tariffs, of which there are many, and they can all be used in a much more powerful and obnoxious way, with legal certainty, than the Tariffs as initially used,” he wrote.


Trump argued that while the ruling restricted his ability to charge fees for certain licenses, it simultaneously strengthened his broader trade powers.

“I can use Licenses to do absolutely ‘terrible’ things to foreign countries, especially those countries that have been RIPPING US OFF for many decades,” he said, adding that the court’s opinion did not explain why the United States could not attach fees to such licenses.

Referring to the Supreme Court of the United States in critical terms, Trump wrote that it had “accidentally and unwittingly” enhanced presidential authority despite what he described as a “ridiculous, dumb, and very internationally divisive ruling.” He also called the court “incompetent,” though he excluded what he termed the “Great Three” justices from his criticism without naming them.

The US president’s remarks suggest he views the ruling as reinforcing his administration’s tariff framework, which has been a central tool in his trade policy, particularly in disputes with countries he accuses of unfair trade practices.

In the same post, Trump warned that the court could next rule in favor of China and other nations on issues related to birthright citizenship. He referenced the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution, asserting that it was written to address the status of formerly enslaved people following the Civil War and questioning interpretations that extend citizenship more broadly.

“The next thing you know they will rule in favor of China and others,” he wrote, arguing that such a decision would make foreign nations “happy and rich.”