The Conversation

Top headlines

Lead story

If you’ve started your holiday shopping early and noticed toys are even pricier than they were last year, you’re not just imagining it. One reason: tariffs. The combined rate on imports from China has surged from about 20% when President Donald Trump took office in January to as high as 145% in the spring, before settling at 47% more recently. That’s still high by historical standards. 


So it’s perhaps no surprise that toy makers are taking Trump to court. Tomorrow, the Supreme Court will hear a blockbuster case that could decide whether a president can use a 1977 emergency law to impose tariffs on vast swaths of imports – including the educational toys made by plaintiff Learning Resources Inc., among others. Trump is the only U.S. president to have used the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to impose tariffs.

As economist Bedassa Tadesse explains, what’s at stake is more than the price of stuff – it’s about the balance of powers. The U.S. Constitution authorizes Congress to set import taxes, but lawmakers have gradually ceded that power to the president in recent decades, setting the stage for the White House’s tariff spree this year. This week’s Supreme Court hearing could have serious implications for accountable policymaking.

[ Sign up for our newsletter on how AI is impacting society. Every Friday. ]

Tracy Walsh

Economy + Business Editor

The Supreme Court’s tariff case isn’t just about trade. Douglas Rissing/Getty Images Plus

Congress has been dodging responsibility for tariffs for decades – now the Supreme Court will decide how far presidents can go alone

Bedassa Tadesse, University of Minnesota Duluth

The Supreme Court’s trade case isn’t just about tariffs. It’s about who sets economic policy in a democracy.

Science + Technology

Environment + Energy

Politics + Society

Education

Economy + Business

International

Trending on site

Today's graphic 📈