The Supreme Court ruled Trump cannot use the 1977 emergency law (IEEPA) to impose broad tariffs, saying he exceeded his authority.
However, he still has five alternative statutory tools including Sections 232, 201, 301, 122, and 338 to impose tariffs through different legal… pic.twitter.com/mrAUpLmks7
— The Market Stats (@TheMarketStats) February 20, 2026
Ok… so I did some digging, and yes, it appears President Trump did have a PLAN B if SCOTUS ruled against him.
The contingency plans include EXPANDED use of Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act, which allows tariffs on national security grounds and has already been used to… https://t.co/swgz2AGc1R pic.twitter.com/YX2VFtuzR0
— MJTruthUltra (@MJTruthUltra) February 20, 2026
The Trump administration has other tariff authorities it could pivot to …
Sec. 122 of 1974 Trade Act. A maximum tariff of 15% for up to 150 days to address deficits. No investigation required. This authority has never been invoked before.
Sec. 338 of the 1930 Tariff Act. A maximum tariff of 50% to address “unreasonable” trade practices. No investigation required. This authority has never been invoked before.
Sec. 301 of the 1974 Trade Act. No limit on tariffs to address “unfair” trade practices. Investigation required. The Trump administration has used this authority before.
Sec. 232 of the 1962 Trade Expansion Act. No limit on tariffs to address threats to “national security.” Investigation required. The Trump administration has used this authority before.
The Trump administration has other tariff authorities it could pivot to …
Sec. 122 of 1974 Trade Act. A maximum tariff of 15% for up to 150 days to address deficits. No investigation required. This authority has never been invoked before.
Sec. 338 of the 1930 Tariff Act. A…
— RenMac: Renaissance Macro Research (@RenMacLLC) February 20, 2026