President Donald Trump on Friday escalated his criticism of House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries and members of the Supreme Court following a 6-3 decision limiting his use of emergency powers to impose tariffs.
The Supreme Court ruled that Trump exceeded his authority when he implemented sweeping global tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), a 1977 law designed for national emergencies. The ruling invalidates tariffs imposed under IEEPA but does not affect other tariffs enacted under separate trade statutes.
Jeffries praised the decision, writing on X that the ruling striking down what he called “harmful Trump Tariffs” was “a big victory for the American people.” He has previously referred to the president as a “wannabe King.”
Asked about Jeffries’s remarks during a press conference, Trump responded bluntly.
“I would call him a low IQ. He doesn’t even know, and I watched him the other day interview. The guy doesn’t even know what a tariff is,” Trump said.
When a reporter noted that there had been bipartisan criticism of the tariffs and asked why he would not work with Congress on a legislative approach, Trump rejected the suggestion that opposition was widespread.
“No, not bipartisan. Excuse me, a few people—” Trump said, acknowledging that some Republicans had broken ranks but insisting party unity remains strong.
“I don’t have to,” Trump said when asked why he would not collaborate with Congress. “I have the right to do tariffs, and I’ve always had the right to do tariffs. And it’s all been approved by Congress, so there’s no reason to do it.”
Trump called the Court’s decision “deeply disappointing” and said he was “ashamed” of some of the justices. He described the ruling as “very unpatriotic and disloyal to our Constitution,” arguing that it improperly restricted executive authority in matters of trade and national interest.
Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the majority, stated that Trump had asserted “extraordinary power to unilaterally impose tariffs of unlimited amount, duration and scope,” but had pointed to no statute clearly authorizing IEEPA to be used for tariffs. The majority concluded that the law did not grant the president such authority.
In dissent, Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote that the ruling likely would not significantly restrict presidential tariff authority going forward, but warned it could create a “mess” for the government, including the possibility of billions of dollars in refunds to businesses that paid tariffs under IEEPA.
In response, Trump announced that he would invoke Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, which permits the president to impose tariffs of up to 15% for 150 days under certain conditions. He said he will move forward with a temporary 10% global tariff under that authority.
The president emphasized that his non-IEEPA tariffs remain in effect and suggested the Court’s opinion leaves intact broad executive authority under other trade statutes. Administration officials indicated they are evaluating additional legal mechanisms to ensure tariff policy continues without interruption.
Reaction in Washington was divided. Democrats and some Republicans described the ruling as an affirmation of the separation of powers and congressional authority over trade. Other GOP lawmakers pledged to work with the administration to reestablish tariff measures through alternative legal pathways.
Small-business groups welcomed the decision, with some calling for clarity on whether refunds will be issued for previously collected duties. International reaction was cautious, with several U.S. trading partners saying they were reviewing the ruling while emphasizing the importance of economic predictability and stability.
The decision sets up a renewed legal and political battle over the scope of presidential trade authority, as Trump moves quickly to shift strategies and maintain his broader tariff agenda.