After the Supreme Court handed down a six-to-three decision limiting how President Donald Trump used the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose so-called Liberation Day tariffs, his critics pounced, declaring the strategy dead.
Do they know President Trump?
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent went on the air and made clear the administration isn't backing down. One tool was whittled down, but the policy is still kicking.
Related: Supreme Court Makes a Decision on Tariffs
The Supreme Court ruled that the administration stretched IEEPA beyond its intended scope. While the statute allows emergency economic measures, the majority found that the tariff action did not fit the framework Congress had designed.
The decision appeared to force surrender, but all it did was cause a pivot.
Bessent told Sunday Morning Futures host Maria Bartiromo that tariff revenue wouldn't stop, framing the ruling as procedural rather than authoritative. He said that the administration still has multiple statutory authorities to address trade imbalances and national security threats.
The objective, he said, hasn't changed: reduce trade deficits, protect domestic industry, and pressure the foreign governments that have been gaming the system.
Bessent explained that the White House will move to Section 122 authority within days, as President Trump already announced a 15% global tariff, adjusting it over the weekend to maintain leverage.
Section 122 allows temporary trade restrictions to address balance-of-payments concerns, and while formal investigations proceed, it remains in effect for 150 days.
Bessent said that the administration also plans to use Section 232, which addresses national security concerns, and Section 301, which targets unfair trade practices. Commerce Department reviews and United States Trade Representative studies will support those actions.
Describing the shift as straightforward, Bessent argued that the Supreme Court's decision clarified the boundaries and strengthened the administration's footing under other statutes.
"In a way, they have made the leverage that he has more draconian because they agreed he does have the right to a full embargo," the secretary said.
"Within three days, the President can put on the Section 122 10% global tariff. So, at Treasury for the full year 2026, we foresee no decrease in revenue," he continued.
Some budget watchdog groups warned tariff revenue would fall. Maya MacGuineas, president of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, shared uncertainty about the long-term math, an argument Bessent rejected outright, saying that revenue projections remain intact under the new authorities.
“Yes, so, Maria, let’s take a step back here. And Maya MacGuineas should be ashamed, and they should take the word ‘responsible’ out of her organization’s name,” Bessent responded. “Everything she told you was completely irresponsible, and look, where were they when the Biden administration blew out the deficit that we had a fiscal contraction last year? So she should be ashamed.”
Using the phrase "new authorities," Bessent meant that different trade laws already on the books, not a fresh attempt at a supposed power grab. The administration plans to rely on Section 122 of the Trade Act for temporary tariffs, along with Sections 232 and 301, statutes written specifically for trade enforcement, giving the White House a firm legal foundation even after the Supreme Court narrowed the use of emergency powers.
Bessent went on to say that tariff collections will continue at the same level because the rates and scope remain consistent. The mechanism changes, but the dollars don't, while he pushed back against claims that tariffs worsen inflation or cause exploding deficits. Years of runaway spending happened long before these trade actions.
The administration is still in direct contact with foreign governments, Bessent said. No major trading partner has recently signaled an intent to abandon negotiated agreements.
The pause on certain reciprocal tariffs last year created a window for negotiation, as several countries used it to strike updated terms. Bessent argued that the pressure works because access to the American market still carries weight.
Section 122's 150-day window gives the administration time to formalize actions under Sections 232 and 301, which often survive judicial scrutiny because Congress wrote them with trade enforcement in mind.
If the studies confirm sustained trade imbalances or national security risks, then longer-term tariffs could follow. Companies weighing overseas production may rethink those calculations, while domestic manufacturing incentives become stronger when foreign goods face steady border costs.
President Trump built his economic platform around reshoring jobs and confronting chronic trade deficits, while Bessent's message signaled continuity. It's an adapting strategy without retreat.
Some markets may see short-term volatility while legal paths shift, testing the resolve of trade partners. Yet the administration made it clear it intends to keep tariffs as leverage in negotiations and as a stream of revenue.
While the Supreme Court narrowed one statute, it didn't erase executive authority in trade policy. The coming months will show whether the layered approach under Sections 122, 232, and 301 yields agreements that last or trigger even more legal battles.
Secretary Bessent laid out a steady path forward after a setback from the high court, while President Trump keeps the tariff framework in place while changing the legal engine driving it. Trade enforcement now moves through channels clearly authorized by Congress.
It's still a simple goal: protect American industry while demanding fair terms.
If you value direct analysis that cuts through noise and explains what Washington is really doing, join PJ Media VIP. Use promo code FIGHT to save 60% and gain full access to exclusive reporting and commentary.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member