Supreme Court Delays Ruling On Trump Tariffs As Market Odds Swing Sharply

The U.S. Supreme Court has delayed its highly anticipated ruling on the legality of President Trump’s tariffs, pushing the decision into next week and triggering a sharp shift in political prediction markets.

According to updated polymarket odds, the probability of the tariffs being ruled legal has climbed to 30%, reflecting a surge in market confidence after the unexpected delay.

Following the missed release, multiple reliable sources , including Reuters , now indicate that the Court is expected to issue its next batch of rulings on Wednesday, January 14, 2026, with the tariff decision likely included in that schedule.

The postponement comes after the Court issued several opinions today but notably avoided addressing the tariff case, leaving one of the most financially consequential rulings of the year unresolved.

Delay Triggers Market Movement

The delay has sparked immediate reactions across trading platforms, legal circles, and political analysts. Prediction markets quickly recalibrated, pushing up the odds of the tariffs being deemed legal. Traders interpret the Court’s silence as an indication that the ruling may be more complex and potentially favorable to the administration’s position.

The tariffs currently under review were imposed through the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), after President Trump declared national emergencies related to trade deficits, fentanyl trafficking, and broader economic vulnerabilities. The sweeping nature of the levies , covering hundreds of billions of dollars of imports , made the case a historic legal challenge.

The Court’s decision will determine whether the executive branch can continue relying on IEEPA to justify broad economic measures, or whether future administrations must use more traditional trade authorities.

If Tariffs Are Ruled Illegal, White House Says It Will Pivot Immediately

While the Supreme Court decision remains pending, the Trump administration has made it clear that it is prepared to respond swiftly if the ruling goes against them. Senior officials have been openly discussing contingency plans for maintaining or reimposing tariffs through alternate legal channels.

National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett stated on CNBC that the administration has “a lot of other legal authorities that can reproduce the deals made with other countries” and emphasized that these tools could be deployed immediately if needed. He added that Trump’s team “expects to prevail” but is planning for all possible outcomes.

This confirms a broader strategy: even if the IEEPA-based tariffs are struck down, the administration intends to keep its trade pressure mechanisms intact by shifting to other statutory authorities already on the books.

Alternative Legal Tools The Administration Could Use

Trade law experts point to several fallback mechanisms that the administration could deploy if IEEPA tariffs are invalidated. These options carry varying limits, procedural steps, and political risks, but collectively offer a menu of pathways to preserve tariff pressure.

Section 232 – National Security Tariffs

Under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, the president can impose tariffs on imports deemed harmful to national security. This route has already been used for steel and aluminum and could theoretically be expanded to other sectors. The primary requirement is a Commerce Department investigation, but there is no rate or duration cap, giving the executive branch broad discretion.

Section 301 – Targeting Unfair Trade Practices

Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 allows tariffs on countries engaged in unfair trade practices. This was the core legal basis for the Trump administration’s China tariffs during his first term. It is more targeted than IEEPA but remains powerful , particularly against specific countries rather than global imports.

Section 122 – Temporary Tariffs For Trade Imbalances

Section 122 permits temporary tariffs (up to 150 days) capped at 15% in response to significant trade imbalances. These measures can be extended only with congressional approval, making them less flexible for sweeping or long-term trade restructuring.

Section 338 – Tariffs For Discriminatory Practices

Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930 authorizes tariffs up to 50% in response to discriminatory trade practices. However, it is considered legally vulnerable and may face immediate court challenges if used as a substitute for IEEPA-level tariffs.

If deployed, these authorities could reestablish large portions of Trump’s tariff regime, though potentially at slower speed, with narrower scope, and lower revenue levels.

Billions In Trade Revenue Hang In The Balance

The stakes are enormous. Estimates suggest that the IEEPA-based tariffs currently generate nearly $350 billion in annualized revenue. If the Supreme Court rules against the administration, that figure could fall sharply , potentially dropping to around $250 billion under the alternative authorities.

A ruling against IEEPA could also trigger massive refund claims from importers who have paid duties under a tariff structure deemed unlawful. Trade lawyers warn that companies may rush to seek refunds, setting up a wave of lawsuits and administrative filings that could stretch for years.

The administration’s contingency planning appears focused on avoiding a significant collapse in tariff revenue or strategic leverage, especially at a moment when trade policy is central to Trump’s economic agenda.

All Eyes On January 14 As Decision Looms

The Court’s next announcement date , Wednesday, January 14 , is now shaping up to be one of the most consequential moments of the year for global trade markets, domestic manufacturers, importers, and geopolitical observers.

Analysts warn that volatility will likely spike in the days leading to the ruling. Businesses dependent on imports are preparing for both outcomes, while economists debate how the decision could influence inflation, supply chains, and international relations.

If the Court upholds IEEPA tariffs, Trump gains strengthened executive authority over economic emergencies. If it strikes them down, the White House pivots to alternative trade laws, ensuring tariffs continue in some form.

Either way, Wednesday’s ruling will define the next chapter of U.S. trade policy, and reshape the legal boundaries of presidential power.

Disclosure: This is not trading or investment advice. Always do your research before buying any cryptocurrency or investing in any services.

Follow us on Twitter @themerklehash to stay updated with the latest Crypto, NFT, AI, Cybersecurity, and Metaverse news!