``` If the US Supreme Court's tariff ruling is "delayed again" today, what does it mean? ```
The U.S. Supreme Court has signaled that it may release an opinion around 10 a.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday (11 p.m. Beijing Time), reigniting market speculation that a key tariff decision is imminent.
The market held similar expectations last Friday, but according to CCTV News, on January 9 local time, the Supreme Court said it would not rule that day on the Trump administration’s global reciprocal tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA).
The market’s main focus is that if Chief Justice John Roberts and his colleagues continue to delay issuing a ruling on IEEPA tariffs, it may indicate a subtle shift in the Court’s stance.
Analysts point out that if the ruling is delayed until after late February, the legal balance, which originally appeared unfavorable to the Trump administration, may tilt. Though institutions like Evercore ISI still mainly believe Trump is likely to lose, they also warn that with every week of delay, the likelihood of a Trump administration win increases.
This decision has a major potential impact on the market. Some strategists worry that removing tariffs will increase uncertainty and drag down stocks, while others think it will boost economic growth.
Additionally, if the Court rules that the tariffs are illegal and mandates refunds, it will impact U.S. finances. Trump has warned on social media that this could involve “hundreds of billions of dollars” in compensation, calling it “total chaos.”
The significance of a delayed ruling: The balance may tilt in Trump’s favor
Evercore ISI analysts Sarah Bianchi and others noted in a report that although the Supreme Court follows its own schedule, the Court is aware of the importance of the case, so they originally expected a decision in the near term. However, if the Supreme Court fails to decide by late February, it could be a favorable sign for Trump and tariff supporters.
Once the ruling drags into late February or beyond, the chance of the government losing the case decreases, due mainly to the issue’s timing and fiscal impact.
J.P. Morgan analysts Amy Ho and Joyce Chang also share this view. Their report notes that although legal experts still broadly expect the Supreme Court to find the president exceeded emergency powers (IEEPA) in imposing tariffs, notably, each week the ruling is delayed, the chances of a Trump administration win rise.
Moreover, J.P. Morgan analysts also suggest another possibility: if the ruling is delayed to February, it may mean the Supreme Court sees this case as a “major case” on par with the Affordable Care Act. Ho and Chang point out:
Historically, the Court has tended to reserve its most consequential rulings for release at the end of the June term to allow lengthy consideration. As evidence, both previous Obamacare rulings were announced in June.
It’s worth noting that, at present, market strategists are divided on how the Court’s decision will affect the markets.
Some forecasters believe abolishing IEEPA tariffs would add uncertainty and pressure stocks; others think lifting import taxes will boost economic growth and markets.
Besides equities, another key issue is the justices’ attitudes toward tariff refunds. If the Court rules against Trump, whether to refund collected tariffs will be the focus.
Analysts note this is critical for the bond market because S&P's sovereign debt rating and stable outlook for the U.S. partly rely on expected tariff revenues.
Trump warns of negative consequences if he loses
Currently, betting market data shows Trump’s chances of winning are low. Kalshi recently put the odds at 32%, and Polymarket at 28%.
The decline in expectations is mainly due to the oral argument on November 5, when some conservative justices asked skeptical questions of Trump’s lawyers.
Although Evercore still expects Trump is more likely to lose, they anticipate the administration is ready to replace most IEEPA-based tariffs with other authorities.
For example, Trump previously imposed import taxes on steel, aluminum, lumber, and other industries using different laws; these industry-specific tariffs are not part of this case.
Trump himself has issued harsh warnings about the consequences of possibly losing. Opponents have repeatedly stressed that the IEEPA does not explicitly mention tariffs, and no previous president has used the law for tariff imposition. In response, Trump argues that if the Supreme Court strikes down these tariffs, the U.S. economy will be severely harmed.
He reiterated this position in a social media post on Monday and voiced concerns over possible tariff refunds. Trump said:
“If for any reason the Supreme Court rules against the United States on tariffs, the actual amount we would need to pay back would reach hundreds of billions of dollars.”
He added that the figure doesn’t include “returns” demanded by nations and companies who invested in factories and equipment to circumvent the tariffs. Trump concluded this would result in “complete chaos, and our country would almost be unable to pay.”
Risk Warning and DisclaimerThe market involves risks, and investments should be made cautiously. This article does not constitute personal investment advice and has not considered the specific investment goals, financial situations, or needs of any individual user. Users should consider whether any opinions, views, or conclusions herein suit their particular situation. Investing based on this article is at your own risk.
