Supreme Court Weighs Tariff Power
- Schulz Trade Law
- Nov 6, 2025
- 2 min read
Supreme Court Weighs Tariff Power:
Michelle Schulz on the Legal Stakes and Business Fallout
Trade attorney Michelle Schulz joins KXAN Austin to explain how the Supreme Court’s review of President Trump’s tariffs could reshape presidential power—and why small businesses are caught in the middle.
The Legal Question: Presidential Power or Overreach?
As the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments over President Trump’s sweeping tariffs on foreign goods, international trade attorney Michelle Schulz provided legal context from Texas. The justices are reviewing whether the administration overstepped its authority by invoking the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA)—a law originally meant for national emergencies.
“The plaintiffs include a group of states as well as small businesses,” Schulz explained. “They’re saying that the President’s interpretation of the law gives the executive branch unlimited authority to impose tariffs—and that’s not what the law was intended for.”
Schulz noted that the justices appeared skeptical.
“No one ever uses this for tariffs, and it doesn’t say it authorizes tariffs,” she said. “It appears there’s a little bit of a stretch.”
The Business Impact: 50% Tariffs and Fading Options
For many of Schulz’s clients, the debate is not theoretical—it’s financial survival.
“This impacts not just large companies but also small ones, and we have both contacting us,” she said. “They’re saying, ‘We can’t mark up the price anymore.’ They’ve reached agreements with their foreign suppliers, but most suppliers aren’t willing to take on that legal burden of paying the tariff.”
Some of the tariffs under review are as high as 50%, which has left many businesses squeezed between rising import costs and consumer resistance.
“It’s a matter of money and whether they can pass the cost to their clients,” Schulz said. “For some, it’s closing their doors or finding new sourcing entirely.”
Beyond the Case:
Manufacturing, Policy, and the Future of Tariffs
While the administration has argued that tariffs encourage domestic manufacturing, Schulz noted that the reality has often been the opposite.
“Importers are not able to manufacture because they can’t import the parts and components at a reasonable price anymore,” she said. “Manufacturing jobs haven’t just come to the U.S.—they’ve also left.”
Even if the Supreme Court sides with the plaintiffs, Schulz warned that tariffs won’t disappear.
“There are other authorities like Section 232 and Section 301, which cover copper, aluminum, steel, furniture, and pharmaceuticals,” she said. “Those aren’t impacted by this decision. This case only applies to the country-by-country tariffs based on how our administration feels about each nation.”
Whether the Court narrows presidential authority or upholds it, businesses will still face a complex tariff environment.
If your company imports goods or components, contact Schulz Trade Law today to review your tariff exposure, explore refund opportunities, and prepare for future trade shifts.
Trade on, but trade informed!
Subscribe to Schulz Trade Law for more updates.
Comments