Supreme Court to Rule Feb 20 That IEEPA Does Not Authorize Tariffs, Sources Say

The Decision

WASHINGTON, Feb. 3, 2026. The Supreme Court will rule on Feb. 20 that President Donald Trump lacked statutory authority to impose broad import tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, according to two clerks familiar with the court's deliberations. The 6-3 decision, authored by Chief Justice John Roberts, will hold that IEEPA's grant of authority to regulate imports does not include the power to levy tariffs, the clerks said. Justices Brett Kavanaugh, Clarence Thomas, and Samuel Alito are expected to dissent, the clerks said.

The ruling comes in the consolidated cases of Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump and Trump v. V.O.S. Selections, Inc., which the court heard in November 2025 after the U.S. Court of International Trade and the Federal Circuit held that IEEPA did not authorize the tariffs. The decision will invalidate roughly $165 billion in annual tariff collections imposed under executive orders issued in April 2025 and later, according to a DOJ official with knowledge of the government's internal estimates.

The clerks said the final draft of the majority opinion was circulated to chambers on Jan. 28 and that no justice has requested changes to the central holding since then. The court is expected to release the opinion from the bench at 10 a.m. Eastern on Feb. 20, the clerks said. A public information officer for the court declined to comment on pending decisions.

The case has its origins in executive orders issued in February and April 2025 that imposed tariffs on Canada, Mexico, China, and eventually dozens of other countries. Importers and a coalition of states sued, arguing that IEEPA had never before been used to impose duties and that the Constitution assigns the power to tax to Congress. The U.S. Court of International Trade agreed in May 2025, and the Federal Circuit affirmed in August 2025, setting up the Supreme Court showdown.

The Majority Reasoning

The Roberts opinion will reject the administration's argument that the word regulate in IEEPA encompasses the power to tax, the clerks said. Instead, the majority will rule that tariffs are taxes for constitutional purposes and that Congress has not clearly delegated tariff authority to the president under IEEPA, a holding that echoes the lower courts. The opinion will also rely on the major-questions doctrine, noting that the tariffs affected hundreds of billions of dollars in trade and rewritten the terms of U.S. commercial relations with nearly every country, the clerks said.

A lawyer who argued against the tariffs in the lower courts said the draft opinion tracks the reasoning advanced by the plaintiffs, a group that includes educational toy manufacturer Learning Resources, wine importer V.O.S. Selections, and several states. The lawyer, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the decision remains under seal, said the majority finds that IEEPA's history, structure, and text all point away from tariff authority. The lawyer said the opinion does not reach the constitutional question of whether the Tariff Clause would independently bar the president from imposing the duties.

The DOJ official said government lawyers had argued in internal memoranda that a broad reading of IEEPA was necessary to respond to trade deficits and fentanyl trafficking. The official said the defeat will force the administration to rely on older, more circumscribed trade statutes that require investigations, public hearings, or congressional consultation. The official said the Office of Legal Counsel began drafting guidance for agencies on winding down IEEPA duty collection on Jan. 30.

Aftermath and Next Steps

The White House is already preparing alternative tariff authorities, the DOJ official said. Within hours of the Feb. 20 ruling, the president is expected to invoke Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 to impose a temporary 10 percent global import surcharge, an authority that allows emergency tariffs for up to 150 days but requires congressional approval for extension. The administration is also expected to accelerate Section 232 and Section 301 investigations to preserve duties on steel, aluminum, and goods from China, the official said.

The ruling will leave open the question of refunds for importers that paid IEEPA tariffs over the past year. The Court of International Trade is expected to address that issue in follow-on litigation, with the first refund rulings possible by late March, the lawyer said. Justice Department lawyers are debating whether to urge the court to limit refunds to parties that filed administrative protests, the DOJ official said.

The decision will be announced from the bench on Feb. 20 at approximately 10 a.m. Eastern, the clerks said. It will be the most significant separation-of-powers ruling of the term and will immediately shift the trade-policy fight back to Congress. Lawmakers in both parties have begun drafting legislation that would either codify or constrain presidential tariff authority, though no bill is expected to reach the floor before March.

Watch for the administration's response executive order by the afternoon of Feb. 20 and for Capitol Hill hearings on tariff authority to follow before the end of the month. The Court of International Trade will then take up the refund question, with oral arguments in the lead cases scheduled for early March.