National Taxpayers Union Foundation (NTUF) on Friday submitted an amicus curiae brief urging the U.S. Supreme Court to reject the executive branch’s unprecedented use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose sweeping tariffs on the grounds of a “trade deficit emergency.”
The brief provides facts from 56 sources, including NTUF expert Bryan Riley, to argue that trade deficits are not unusual, that striking down the tariffs would not be catastrophic for the federal budget or supply chain resiliency, and that high protective tariffs have been short-lived in American history.
“Most U.S. imports are raw materials and components used by America’s manufacturers and farmers, and tariffs make those much more expensive,” said Joe Bishop-Henchman, NTUF Executive Vice President. “We urge the Supreme Court to uphold the constitutional precedent that it is Congress, not the President, who sets tariff rates.”
The brief cites a letter circulated by National Taxpayers Union, NTUF’s sister organization, and signed by 465 economists, including nine Nobel laureates and former U.S. Senator Phil Gramm, urging the high court to consider centuries of economic theory, evidence, and overwhelming consensus that trade deficits do not represent an extraordinary threat. The number of signatories to the letter has grown since NTUF’s brief was filed.
“The Trump Administration’s submission to the Supreme Court of the United States argues that terminating its sweeping national emergency tariffs would have catastrophic consequences for our economy,” according to the economists’ letter. “The greater threat to the economy of the United States is not that the Trump Administration’s tariffs will be struck down, but that they will be allowed to remain in place.”
The brief was submitted in Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump and Trump v. V.O.S. Selections Inc., the two tariff cases that will be heard by the high court November 5.
Read the Amicus Brief submitted in Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump.
Read the letter to the court signed by 465 (and counting) economists.
Read further analysis of the amicus brief in a post written by Joe Bishop-Henchman.