The U.S. Supreme Court has issued a bombshell ruling, deeming President Donald Trump’s global tariffs illegal and ending them.

Furious, Trump attacked the court’s judges as “idiots and pet dogs” and vowed to reinstate controversial import taxes, starting with a new 10% global tariff.

The court ruled 6-3 to uphold a lower court’s earlier finding that Trump illegally imposed tariffs under the National Emergencies Act.

The ruling is the court’s most significant and consequential criticism of Trump’s policies since he returned to office.

At a special press conference later, Trump said he was “absolutely ashamed” of the judges who ruled against him, saying they “didn’t have the courage to do what was right for our country.” He said without evidence that the country was being “swayed by foreign interests.”

decision This means the United States could have to return more than $100 billion to companies that paid the tariffs. However, it is unclear how the refund process will work, And the court’s decision did not provide clear guidance.

“Foreign countries that have been robbing us for years are overjoyed, so happy, they’re dancing in the streets,” Trump said.

“But they don’t dance for long.”

Mr. Trump said he plans to use legislation unrelated to the court ruling to introduce new tariffs that “could potentially be higher” than previous tariffs.

He said he would sign an order for new 10% global tariffs late Friday local time, under a provision in U.S. trade law that allows import duties to be levied for up to 150 days.

Legal experts say the Supreme Court’s decision is likely to result in a flurry of new claims in lower courts.

Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, who dissented from the majority decision, wrote that “as oral argument acknowledged, the refund process is likely to be ‘chaotic.'”

“The United States could be required to refund billions of dollars to importers who paid IEEPA tariffs, even though some importers may already be passing those costs on to consumers and others.”

The decision does not apply to commodity tariffs such as steel, aluminum, copper, automobiles and auto parts, timber, and furniture.

a windfall of hope

Last April, Trump announced so-called “reciprocal tariffs” on imports from more than 180 countries, angering many of the United States’ trading partners.

These tariffs ranged from a minimum ‘baseline’ amount of 10% to 49% in Cambodia and 48% in Laos.

A basic customs duty of 10% was applied to Australian exports. At the time, Prime Minister Antony Albanese said the tariffs were “completely unjust” and “unfriendly”.

Faced with pressure to reduce the cost of living, Trump eliminated tariffs on some food products in November.

Australian exporters to the US are now hoping for a windfall.

The ABC reported this week that modeling by consulting firm EY Australia found Australian businesses could be liable for more than $1.4 billion in restitution if the tariffs are deemed illegal.

“Timing is critical,” Luke Brunson, global trade leader at EY Oceania, told the ABC after the ruling.

He advised businesses to begin the process of reviewing records and preparing documentation “to preserve potential refund entitlements within statutory deadlines.”

No authority

The decision is the result of legal action taken by a coalition of small businesses and a group of U.S. states.

They argued that Trump overstepped his authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) by imposing the tariffs.

The law gives the president broad powers over economic transactions during a national emergency.

Trump declared two national emergencies to justify the tariffs.

One case was related to the “influx of illicit drugs” from Canada, Mexico and China, which he said created a “public health crisis”.

The other is due to a “large and persistent” trade deficit that has “impaired critical supply chains.”

However, the Supreme Court ruled that “IEEPA does not authorize the President to impose tariffs,” and that power instead resides with Congress.

Chief Justice John Roberts wrote that the president would need to ‘demonstrate clear Congressional approval’ to justify his unusual claim of authority to impose tariffs. “He can’t do it.”

Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom of California, one of the states that sued to halt the tariffs, called the decision “a huge victory for families and small businesses across the country who have suffered under this man’s ego.”

Mike Pence, who served as vice president during Trump’s first term and has been a vocal opponent of tariffs, said this means “American families and businesses can breathe a sigh of relief.”

Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito joined Justice Kavanaugh in dissenting from the majority decision.

“The tariffs at issue here may or may not be wise policy,” Judge Kavanaugh wrote. “But as a matter of text, history and precedent, they are clearly legal.”

However, Amy Coney Barrett and Neil Gorsuch, two of President Trump’s appointees to the court, sided with Chief Justice Roberts and the court’s left-leaning justices in favor of repealing the tariffs.