World reacts as US Supreme Court limits Trump’s tariff powers | Donald Trump News

President Donald Trump said he would raise global tariffs on imported goods to 15 percent after the United States Supreme Court overturned his previous trade measures.

The president announced his decision on Saturday, revising an earlier decision impose a new 10 percent global tariff following the Supreme Court ruling, which sparked immediate concern and reactions from governments and markets.

The US Supreme Court’s rulings and Trump’s new tariffs have left countries grappling with the legal and economic consequences, raising questions about continued agreements, tariff cuts and the legality of past duties.

Governments are now evaluating how the new levy will affect key industries, investment plans and trade negotiations, while analysts warn that uncertainty could continue until legal and trade frameworks are clarified.

South Korea

In South Korea, one of the US’s closest allies, the presidential office, Blue House, released a statement saying the government will review the trade agreement and make decisions in the national interest, casting a question mark over the agreement signed last November, which cut tariffs from 25 to 15 percent in exchange for $350 billion in cash and investments from South Korea in the US.

“For major South Korean companies in chemicals, pharmaceuticals and semiconductors, the Supreme Court ruling was positive: Even if Trump imposes the new 10 percent tariffs under Article 122, they will still pay a lower rate,” said Jack Barton, an Al Jazeera correspondent in Seoul.

“However, exporters of cars, more than half of which go to the US, remain subject to the 25 percent tariff, and steel exports continue to be hit with 50 percent duties under Section 232, which were not affected by the ruling.”

The South Korean government is expected to move cautiously. Exports account for 85 percent of South Korea’s gross domestic product, with the US as the second largest market.

“Officials have indicated that rapid changes could jeopardize major deals, including a recent multibillion-dollar shipbuilding deal with the U.S. and other investments,” Barton said.

“Although no definitive policy statement has yet been made, the Blue House has said that the trade agreement will be carefully reviewed and changes are likely.”

India

India has faced some of the highest US tariffs under Trump’s previous use of emergency trade powers. The president first imposed a 25 percent levy on Indian imports and later added another 25 percent on the country’s purchases of Russian oil, bringing the total to 50 percent.

Earlier this month, the US and India reached a framework trade agreement. Trump said Prime Minister Narendra Modi had agreed to stop buying Russian oil and that US tariffs would be cut to 18 percent on India’s top exports to the US, including clothing, pharmaceuticals, gems and textiles. Meanwhile, India said it would eliminate or reduce tariffs on all US industrial goods and a range of agricultural products.

According to political economist MK Venu, founding editor of the Indian publication, The Wire, “Critics have argued that New Delhi should have waited for the US Supreme Court decision before finalizing the interim trade deal and even trade analysts formerly associated with the government maintained that it would have been wiser to wait for the court ruling.”

Venu added that Trump was eager to finalize the trade deal, which includes a commitment to buy $500 billion worth of new imports in defense, energy and artificial intelligence (AI) from the US over the next five years.

While India, he said, welcomes the reduction of tariffs to 18 percent and the removal of punitive duties on Russian imports, uncertainty remains over negotiations as the Supreme Court ruling affects the legal basis of previous tariffs.

“The Indian trade delegation is likely to wait for the final outcome of the Supreme Court’s ruling before proceeding with further negotiations, and countries around the world are expected to follow the court’s ruling rather than rush to legislate on trade agreements deemed unconstitutional,” he said.

China

China reacted in a muted fashion to the Supreme Court ruling, with much of the country still on the Lunar New Year holiday.

Al Jazeera’s Rob McBride, reporting from Beijing, said: “The Chinese embassy in Washington issued a blanket statement pointing out that trade wars benefit no one, and that the decision is likely to be broadly welcomed in China, which has long been a primary target of Trump’s tariff policies.”

Since last April, he said, China has faced several low tariffs, including 10 percent on chemicals used in fentanyl production exported to the U.S. and 100 percent on electric vehicles.

Analysts have estimated that the overall tariff level, about 36 percent, could now drop to about 21 percent, providing some relief to an economy already under pressure from the COVID-19 pandemic, a prolonged property market crisis and falling exports.

Shipments from China to the US have reportedly failed by about a fifth in the past year.

“Beijing has tried to make up for losses in the US market by strengthening trade ties with Southeast Asian countries and pursuing agreements with the European Union,” McBride said.

“The Supreme Court’s ruling could also create a more favorable atmosphere ahead of a planned state visit by Trump in early April, when he is expected to meet President Xi Jinping, potentially opening the way for a recovery in relations between the world’s two largest economies.”

Canada

Canada welcomed the U.S. Supreme Court ruling, but pointed out that there are still some challenges ahead.

Regional leaders across the country, including those from British Columbia and Ontario, signaled the ruling as a positive step, according to Al Jazeera’s Ian Wood, reporting from Toronto.

However, Canada-U.S. Trade Minister Dominic LeBlanc said significant work remains as Section 232 tariffs on steel, aluminum, softwood lumber and autos remained in place.

Meanwhile, Ontario Premier Doug Ford added that while optimism has grown, tensions remain over what Donald Trump will do next, Wood said.

Mexico

Mexico’s president, Claudia Sheinbaum, said her government would carefully review the Supreme Court’s decision to determine its scope and the extent to which Mexico could be affected.

“The reality is that despite everything we’ve heard over the last year about tariffs or the threat of tariffs, Mexico has actually ended up in quite a privileged, even competitive position, especially compared to other countries,” Al Jazeera’s Julia Gliano, reporting from Mexico City.

“We must remember that Mexico is the US’s largest trading partner, and the two countries, along with Canada, share a major trade agreement that protects most products from the so-called reciprocal tariffs announced by President Trump.

“There were also punitive tariffs related to fentanyl and illegal immigration along the U.S. border, which Mexico managed to suspend while negotiations on those matters continued. Now the tariffs that Mexico has been subject to on steel, aluminum and auto parts are not affected by today’s decision.”

So, the government here in Mexico, she said, is now ready to see what the Trump administration comes up with next, as it stems from today’s decision by the Supreme Court.

France

French President Emmanuel Macron hailed “the existence of checks and balances in democracies” after the Supreme Court ruling, telling reporters at an event in the capital that his country wanted to continue exporting “under the fairest rules possible and not be subject to unilateral decisions.”

The country’s finance minister, Nicolas Forissier, told British newspaper The Financial Times that the EU has the tools to hit back at the US over its tariff policy, suggesting a more combative approach.

Germany

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said he expected the tariff burden on his country’s economy to be lower after the US Supreme Court ruling, raising the prospect of German companies recovering billions in refunds.

Flagging an upcoming visit to Washington, Merz told Germany’s ARD broadcaster that he would present a “coordinated European position” on the matter, pointing out that tariff policy is determined by the European Union rather than individual member states.

Finance Minister Lars Klingbeil said Europe is strengthening its independence and sovereignty, building new trade relations worldwide and concluding free trade agreements.

Limits on Trump’s Tariff Powers

A senior legal scholar told Al Jazeera that the US Supreme Court ruling is a key moment in the legal battle over Trump’s tariffs, focusing on constitutional restrictions rather than economics.

Frank Bowman, professor emeritus at the University of Missouri School of Law, told Al Jazeera that the court for the first time confronted what he called Trump’s broader challenge to the rule of law.

“This is a ruling that is important in several ways. The first, more broadly, is that it is the first time in the last year that the Supreme Court has stepped in and tried to do something about Donald Trump’s general attack on the rule of law in the United States.

“And make no mistake, while tariffs are certainly about economics, what Trump has done over the last year is essentially defy the law. And the Supreme Court, thankfully, decided that they’d had enough and they were going to say no. So, they’re certainly not about economic policy. They made a decision that the president simply overstepped his constitutional authority.”