Trump Plans New Trade Probes to Restore Tariffs After Court Setback

President Donald Trump is moving quickly to revitalise his ambitious tariff agenda after a significant legal setback last week, signalling a fresh phase of U.S. trade policy that could reshape global commerce and strain relationships with major trading partners.

The Supreme Court’s decision to strike down broad tariff levies that Trump had imposed under emergency powers left his administration scrambling for alternative legal foundations to maintain import taxes. Now, high-level officials are preparing a suite of new trade investigations that could give the president renewed authority to levy duties on a wide array of foreign products on national security grounds.

New Investigations Under Old Trade Laws

Central to Trump’s strategy are potential probes under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, a statute that permits the president to impose tariffs if imports threaten U.S. national security. The Commerce Department is reportedly planning inquiries into the effects of foreign imports on industries including batteries, electrical grid components, telecommunications equipment, plastics and industrial chemicals. These probes could provide the legal basis for fresh tariffs once completed.

This approach marks a pivot from the broad, emergency-based authority Trump relied on previously, which the court ruled was not legally valid for imposing sweeping tariffs without legislative approval. Section 232 has been successfully used in the past — notably to impose tariffs on steel and aluminum — and is generally considered more defensible in court.

In addition to Section 232, Trump’s team plans to pursue actions under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, the legal framework used to target unfair trading practices by foreign governments. The U.S. Trade Representative has identified potential areas of concern for these investigations, including industrial excess capacity, forced labor, discrimination against American technology companies, digital taxes, ocean pollution, and food product trade practices.

Temporary Global Tariffs and Social Media Escalation

Even as these investigations begin, the administration has not paused on immediate tariff action. In response to the Supreme Court ruling, the White House previously announced a 10% global tariff on many imported goods, which Trump has threatened to raise to 15% in statements on social media. He has also warned that any country that tries to “play games” with its trade deals would face even steeper duties — a post that underscores the administration’s combative tone.

Legal experts note that the temporary tariff — imposed under a separate statute, Section 122 of the Trade Act — can remain in force for up to 150 days without congressional sign-off, but it is not a long-term solution. During that window, the administration aims to build a new portfolio of tariffs through the more durable Section 232 and Section 301 authorities.

Global Response and Trade Uncertainty

The Supreme Court’s decision and the ensuing policy shift have fueled uncertainty among U.S. trade partners. The European Union has put the ratification of a trade deal with the United States on hold, citing a need for clarity on Washington’s tariff regime before proceeding. Leaders in China, Japan, South Korea and the United Kingdom are also closely watching developments, mindful that ongoing U.S. tariff policy could affect negotiations and economic ties.

Beijing’s response reflects this concern. China’s Ministry of Commerce said it is assessing how Washington’s tariff strategies could impact Chinese exports and pledged to defend its national interests if necessary. At the same time, some analysts argue that the new 15% global tariff could ease overall tariff burdens for certain countries compared with prior, higher rates under the now-invalidated measures.

Political and Economic Stakes

Domestically, the fight over tariff authority has become a flashpoint in Washington politics. The Supreme Court’s ruling — which held that Trump had exceeded his powers under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) — reaffirmed the constitutional role of Congress in authorising taxation and trade policy. That decision has implications beyond tariffs, underscoring limits on presidential authority to reshape economic policy without legislative backing.

Trump’s push to rebuild his tariff wall could also shape political debates ahead of midterm elections, turning trade policy into a campaign issue that cuts across economic sectors. Supporters argue that higher duties protect American jobs and industries from unfair foreign competition, while critics warn that tariffs raise costs for consumers and heighten global tensions.

Economists also express concern about market uncertainty. The abrupt shift from one legal regime to another — and the legal challenges that could follow — has clouded prospects for international investment and trade flows. Companies that paid tariffs under the IEEPA authority might seek refunds, and disagreements over new tariff investigations could lead to protracted litigation.

What’s Next?

As the Trump administration presses forward, the trade landscape remains unsettled. With national security and unfair trade investigations on the horizon, tariffs could return in numerous forms — but potentially at the cost of diplomatic friction and extended legal battles.

Whether these new approaches can withstand judicial scrutiny — and whether they will achieve the president’s broader economic objectives — will be key questions in the weeks and months ahead as global markets and policymakers adjust to an evolving U.S. trade strategy.