Should the US president have broad authority to impose tariffs without Congressional approval?

Background

The U.S. Constitution explicitly grants Congress the power to regulate foreign commerce and impose import tariffs. Over the decades, however, Congress has passed a series of laws — including the Trade Act of 1974, the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, and the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) — that delegate significant tariff authority to the president under various circumstances. Beginning in early 2025, President Trump used several of these authorities to impose sweeping tariffs on imports from dozens of countries, raising the effective U.S. tariff rate to its highest level since 1947, according to the Tax Foundation. The Supreme Court's February 2026 ruling in Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump struck down the use of IEEPA to impose tariffs, finding that the law did not authorize them. The administration quickly pivoted to other statutory authorities, including Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, to reimpose a 10 percent global tariff. Multiple bipartisan bills — such as the Grassley-Cantwell Trade Review Act and the Reclaim Trade Powers Act — have been introduced in Congress to reassert legislative control over tariffs, though none have been enacted.

Supporters of broad presidential tariff authority argue that the executive branch needs flexibility to respond rapidly to unfair trade practices, national security threats, and shifting geopolitical conditions without waiting for slow-moving congressional deliberation. They contend tariffs can serve as effective leverage in trade negotiations, pointing to bilateral deals struck with countries including the United Kingdom, Japan, and South Korea during 2025. Opponents counter that concentrating this power in one office violates the constitutional design of checks and balances and allows tariffs — which function as taxes on imports — to be imposed without democratic accountability. Senator Chuck Grassley has stated that Congress has delegated its clear authority over foreign commerce to the executive branch for too long. Legal scholars and some justices have invoked the major questions doctrine, arguing that Congress must be explicit when granting the president authority of such extraordinary economic significance.

The stakes of this debate are substantial. The Yale Budget Lab estimated that 2025 tariffs raised consumer prices by roughly 1.4 percent in the short run, amounting to an average loss of about $1,800 per household. Research from the Federal Reserve Board found that tariffs implemented through November 2025 raised core goods prices by 3.1 percent through February 2026. The question of who controls tariff policy affects American consumers, manufacturers, farmers facing retaliatory tariffs, and the broader global trading system. How this authority is ultimately allocated — through court rulings, new legislation, or the status quo — will shape the balance of power between the president and Congress for years to come.