Court's in session, and tonight we are pulling out all the stops, because this story is too big for just one of us. The Supreme Court struck down the largest tax increase in a generation, six to three. The catch? They never called it a tax. They called it a tariff. So I brought the whole crew. Three hosts, one ruling.
Here is the charge. The President declared an economic emergency and used a 1977 law, the I E E P A, to put tariffs on nearly everything we import. The Court read that law and said, quote, it does not authorize tariffs. Six justices, three of his own appointees among them. You do not get to invent a nationwide tax out of an emergency you declared yourself.
“IEEPA does not authorize the President to impose tariffs.”
— U.S. Supreme Court, 6-3
That's my cue. Pull up. Because here is the part that hits your kitchen table. That tariff was a tax, and you paid it at the register, on groceries, on car parts, on the stroller. The Tax Foundation put it around a thousand dollars per household last year, and as much as thirteen hundred this year. Add it up across the country, and the government collected a hundred and sixty-six billion dollars. From you. Quietly. One checkout at a time.
$1,300 — added cost per household in 2026 - the tariff you paid at the register
Tax Foundation via Brookings
So the Court says it was illegal. Good. The order comes down, refund it. And about twenty billion has actually gone back. But watch this move. The administration is appealing, not to keep the tariffs, they lost that, but to argue that only the companies that hired lawyers and sued should get their money back. Everybody else? Tough luck. They want to keep the money a court told them to return.
THE REFUND FIGHT
- A court ordered all $166B refunded
- ~$20B has actually been paid back
- Now appealing: only those who SUED get repaid
And that's me. I'll say the quiet part, as a man who voted Republican for forty years. A tariff is a tax. We used to know that. The average rate hit almost seventeen percent. It did not shrink the deficit, it did not bring the factories roaring back, it just made the checkout longer for working people. You do not get to declare an emergency, reach into a 1977 law, and tax the whole country by yourself. That is not conservatism. That is a king with a customs house. Facts are hard to argue with.
16.9% — average effective tariff rate - for no drop in the deficit
Brookings
So here is the verdict, from all three of us. The Court said it was never legal. Marcus showed you it came out of your pocket. Mark reminded you a tax is a tax no matter who signs it. Six to three, the most powerful man in the country tried to tax you by decree, and the Court handed it back. And they are still fighting to keep your refund. So watch the hands, not the mouth. Defense rests. You do not have to.
THE VERDICT
- IEEPA can't be used to tax (6-3)
- You paid ~$1,300 per household
- They're appealing to keep YOUR refund
Sources
- [1] Supreme Court — Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump — IEEPA does not authorize tariffs (6-3)
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/24-1287_4gcj.pdf - [2] NPR — The Supreme Court is in its final stretch this term. Here are the major cases left
https://www.npr.org/2026/06/09/nx-s1-5847967/supreme-court-major-cases-left-2026 - [3] NBC News — $20 billion in tariff refunds paid so far, with more on the way
https://www.nbcnews.com/business/business-news/trump-tariff-refunds-paid-ieepa-rcna347080 - [4] Fortune — Trump administration takes steps to appeal ruling allowing importers to seek tariff refunds
https://fortune.com/2026/06/01/trump-administration-plan-appeal-illegal-ieepa-tariff-universal-refunds/ - [5] Brookings — Brookings experts on the Supreme Court's tariff decision
https://www.brookings.edu/articles/brookings-experts-on-the-supreme-courts-tariff-decision/ - [6] Holland & Knight — IEEPA Tariff Refund Update: Government Appeals CIT Refund Order
https://www.hklaw.com/en/insights/publications/2026/06/ieepa-tariff-refund-update-government-appeals