Trump Praises Kavanaugh as “New Hero” Following Supreme Court Tariff Decision

President Donald Trump has declared Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh his “new hero” following the high court’s recent 6-3 ruling that rejected Trump’s sweeping tariff powers under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA).

In a Saturday morning post on his Truth Social platform, Trump wrote: “My new hero is United States Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh and, of course, Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito. There is no doubt in anyone’s mind that they want to, MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!”

Trump’s praise comes after Kavanaugh authored a forceful dissent against the majority opinion, calling the court’s decision “illogical” in its distinction between different types of trade restrictions.

“As they interpret the statute, the President could, for example, block all imports from China but cannot order even a $1 tariff on goods imported from China,” Kavanaugh wrote in his dissent. “That approach does not make much sense.”

The justice argued that the IEEPA “does not draw such an odd distinction between quotas and embargoes on the one hand and tariffs on the other,” but instead empowers the president to use various tools, including tariffs, to regulate imports during declared national emergencies.

The case stemmed from Trump’s unilateral decision last year to bypass Congress and impose tariffs on nearly every country globally by invoking the IEEPA. At the time, the president justified the action by citing what he described as emergencies—specifically, an influx of illicit drugs from countries including China, Mexico, and Canada, alongside a trade deficit he claimed had devastated American manufacturing.

In a speech on Friday addressing the court’s decision, Trump praised Kavanaugh for “his genius and his great ability,” adding he was “very proud of that appointment.”

Despite ruling against the administration’s use of IEEPA for tariffs, Kavanaugh noted in his dissent that the court’s decision may not “substantially constrain” presidential tariff powers going forward due to “numerous other federal statutes” that authorize such actions. Trump appeared to validate this point when he announced a global tariff increase from 10% to 15% on Saturday, this time citing Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 as legal justification.

The implications of the Supreme Court’s decision could be far-reaching. Kavanaugh warned the ruling might necessitate refunding “billions of dollars to importers who paid the IEEPA tariffs,” even though many businesses have already passed these costs on to consumers. At oral arguments, this potential refund process was acknowledged as likely to be a “mess.”

Additionally, Kavanaugh expressed concern that the decision could “generate uncertainty” regarding what government officials have described as trade deals worth trillions of dollars with foreign nations, including agreements with China, the United Kingdom, and Japan.

The ruling represents a significant legal setback for Trump’s trade strategy, which has heavily relied on presidential authority to impose tariffs without congressional approval. However, his swift pivot to alternative legal justifications suggests the administration is determined to maintain its aggressive tariff policy through whatever legal means remain available.

The case also highlights the complex relationship between the former president and his Supreme Court appointees, with Trump appearing to value loyalty in judicial decisions even as the court has ruled against his administration on several high-profile issues.

Trade experts note that this legal battle over tariff authority comes amid growing bipartisan skepticism about free trade and increasing support for protectionist measures, particularly regarding economic relations with China.