Members of the Supreme Court sit for a group photo following the recent addition of Associate Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, at the Supreme Court building on Capitol Hill on Friday, Oct 07, 2022, in Washington, D.C. (Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post via Getty Images)
This included Trump’s appointees, who appeared to struggle with separation-of-powers issues that could vastly expand presidential authority — not only for Trump but for his successors as well.
Barrett, in particular, pressed U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer on this, asking: "Can you point to any other place in the code or any other time in history where that phrase — together with ‘regulate importation’ — has been used to confer tariff-imposing authority?"
Gorsuch later asked Sauer about his "theory of the Constitution" and "major questions doctrine," indicating concern about separation-of-powers issues and granting too much power to the executive.
TRUMP ASKS SUPREME COURT FOR URGENT RULING ON TARIFF POWERS AS 'STAKES COULD NOT BE HIGHER'
Scott Bessent, U.S. Treasury Secretary, speaks to reporters outside the White House in Washington, D.C., on Wed, Nov. 5, 2025. (Eric Lee/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
Court watchers and legal experts said after arguments that a Trump administration win could be more difficult than expected, though each cautioned it is hard to draw conclusions from roughly two hours of oral arguments — a fraction of the total time justices spend reviewing a case.
Jonathan Turley, a law professor and Fox News contributor, said in a blog post that the justices "were skeptical and uncomfortable with the claim of authority, and the odds still favored the challengers."
"However, there is a real chance of a fractured decision that could still produce an effective win for the administration," Turley added.
SUPREME COURT PREPARES TO CONFRONT MONUMENTAL CASE OVER TRUMP EXECUTIVE POWER AND TARIFF AUTHORITY
Jack Goldsmith, a former assistant attorney general in the George W. Bush administration, did not go quite as far.
"I think that it is fair to say that the justices the government needs to win the case — Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett — asked the government very hard questions that did express skepticism about important elements of its case," Goldsmith said in a New York Times interview.
"But they also asked the other side very hard questions. I do not think any of these three tipped off their hands definitively. I did not find anything terribly surprising in the questions."
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Brent Skorup, a legal fellow at the CATO Institute, told Fox News Digital in an emailed statement that members of the Court seemed uncomfortable with expanding presidential power over tariffs.
"Most justices appeared attentive to the risks of deferring to a president's interpretation of an ambiguous statute and the executive branch ‘discovering’ new powers in old statutes," Skorup said.
"The justices were skeptical and uncomfortable with the claim of authority, and the odds still favored the challengers. However, there is a real chance of a fractured decision that could still produce an effective win for the administration."
The case is Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump (consolidated with Trump v. V.O.S. Selections). A ruling is expected by late June.
Breanne Deppisch is a national politics reporter for Fox News Digital covering the Trump administration, with a focus on the Justice Department, FBI and other national news. She previously covered national politics at the Washington Examiner and The Washington Post, with additional bylines in Politico Magazine, the Colorado Gazette and others. You can send tips to Breanne at Breanne.Deppisch@fox.com, or follow her on X at @breanne_dep.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/supreme-court-justices-show-skepticism-trumps-emergency-tariff-powers-during-oral-arguments