WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court's decision to strike down a pillar of President Donald Trump's sweeping tariff policies could have broad impacts on Michigan's trade-reliant economy, though little will change for the state's signature auto industry.

"The decision released this morning from the Supreme Court, striking down the use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, correctly recognizes that the law was misapplied when targeting our friendly trading partners in North America and elsewhere," said Glenn Stevens, executive director of MichAuto, the automotive arm of the Detroit Regional Chamber.

"While we recognize that other avenues exist for the Administration to again impose these tariffs, we continue to stress that Michigan's businesses are disproportionately negatively impacted by tariffs, especially in our automotive, manufacturing, and agriculture sectors," he added in a statement.

The ruling may provide momentary relief to some Michigan businesses, which have seen on-again-off-again import tax levies and threats from Trump since he won the presidential election in 2024. But the GOP leader and famously pro-tariff businessman vowed Friday afternoon to pursue other legal avenues to deploy duties on foreign goods entering the United States.

"Their decision is incorrect, but it doesn't matter because we have very powerful alternatives," Trump said in a White House press briefing. He cited authorities under the Tariff Act of 1930, Expansion Act of 1962 and Trade Act of 1974.

Existing tariffs on certain products — namely automotive goods, steel, aluminum and wood — were notably not affected by the Supreme Court's decision. The Trump administration levied those import taxes using what are widely known as Section 232 and Section 301 authorities, granted by the 1962 and 1974 acts, respectively.

The president said Friday that he would impose a 10% global tariff for 150 days to replace some of his emergency duties that were struck down. The order to do so, according to Trump, would be made under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, and the duties would be over and above tariffs that are currently in place.

The new 10% tariff would go into effect in about three days, he said.

The statute Trump cited allows the president to impose duties of up to 15% for up to 150 days on any and all countries related to "large and serious" balance of payments issues. It does not require investigations or impose other procedural limits.

Jason Miller, a professor of supply chain management at Michigan State University, said he expects Trump to use every option at his disposal to continue global tariffs — including the same authorities he relied on to deploy automotive tariffs in 2025. Those levies require federal investigations into national security issues or unfair trade practices harming U.S. interests.

"This isn't over," he said in an email.

The professor explained that the Trump administration will likely use every option at its disposal.

If federal courts block any of Trump's temporary tariffs, Miller suggested, there will be "a massive surge of imports into the United States in the short term." Many of those imports would likely be destined for Michigan.

The Great Lakes State imported about $167 billion worth of goods last year, fifth-most nationally despite being the 10th-largest U.S. state. The auto industry drives more than half of that total, though other industries more directly impacted by the now-defunct IEEPA tariffs — like furniture, chemicals and pharmaceuticals — each represent more than $1 billion worth of imports annually for Michigan, according to federal trade data.

Stevens, of MichAuto, emphasized that businesses in Michigan and elsewhere perform best when they have certainty over tax and economic conditions.

"Really for our industries in Michigan, our focus remains on: Let's get a renewed and stronger USMCA agreement in place. That is what really impacts Michigan's economy, and that's our focus right now," he said in a phone interview, referring to the United States-Mexico-Canada free trade agreement currently under federal review.

"How this decision impacts Michigan's economy is kind of hard to tell right now," Stevens said. "And because there has been this signaling by the administration of potential other tools, it still has a level of uncertainty that our industries just don't operate well under."

Uncertainty remains

Automotive companies and other manufacturers had just settled into the new normal with the IEEPA tariffs, even if they didn’t like paying them, said Chauncey Mayfield II, a corporate attorney who leads law firm Honigman LLP’s Commercial Transactions Practice Group in Detroit. Mayfield represents several companies in those sectors.

They had figured out processes over the last year on how the import taxes would be paid and determining if the supplier or customer would be on the hook, Mayfield said in an interview. Now, many of those internal systems may need to be redesigned and renegotiated depending on what Trump does next.

“For a lot of it, people just know that it's going to be a mess,” the attorney said. “I think it's one of the opinions of the court said it — 'Well, this is going to be a mess.' This is going to be difficult to process.”

And much remains uncertain about how the tariffs will be unwound, Mayfield said, including how refunds might be issued and which government agency would process them.

Jennifer Smith-Veluz, a Washington, D.C., international trade law attorney for the Detroit-based firm Butzel Long, which specializes in representing auto suppliers, said she’s telling clients that they will need to file a lawsuit with the U.S. Court of International Trade if they want to get a tariff refund.

“Refunds are not going to be forthcoming form this administration, because they’re sore about the decision,” she said. “It’s going to have to be litigated, and the president indicated as such.”

But even for many auto suppliers, it will likely make sense to try to get that money back, even if they have to go to court, Smith-Veluz said.

While the Section 232 tariffs on autos and auto parts weren’t impacted by Friday’s Supreme Court decision, suppliers were often still on the hook to pay tariffs on other goods that did fall under the court’s decision — like on raw materials they need to make the car parts, or certain parts that didn’t fall under the 232 requirements.

Suppliers were paying especially high duties on imported parts and other goods coming from China under the now-canceled IEEPA rules, Smith-Veluz added.

Michigan State University economist David Ortega, who specializes in food and agricultural studies, emphasized how tariffs and uncertainty have been similarly impacting Michigan farmers.

"We may not be as big an agricultural state as California, but we are one of the most diverse agricultural states — actually second to California," Ortega said in a phone interview. In a social media post Thursday, he pointed out that alarming national trends for farmers that arose from Trump's tariff regime are hitting Michigan, too.

"The latest trade data out today show a pattern consistent with what we would expect in the current trade conflict environment: both agricultural exports and imports declined, but exports fell much more sharply, widening the food and ag trade deficit even further," Ortega wrote.

"For American farmers, that translates to lost export market sales, and lost income growth opportunities. For consumers, tighter import flows can translate into reduced availability for certain products and more price pressures," he added.

Commenting on the tariff ruling Friday afternoon, Ortega said "trade policy uncertainty ... in and of itself is inflationary. You have companies having to make alternate sourcing strategies, and there are just a lot of transaction costs from this current trade environment."

"It's hurting both producers and consumers in the state of Michigan," he said.

Auto industry reaction

Some in the tariff-battered U.S. automotive sector cheered the justices' ruling, though most were mum or neutral on the news. Ford Motor Co. spokesperson Dave Tovar, for example, said the company is "studying the effects of the Supreme Court’s decision and assessing its implications."

General Motors Co. and Chrysler parent company Stellantis NV did not comment on the ruling.

The Alliance for Automotive Innovation, the industry's top lobbying group in Washington, also did not issue a statement but noted in an email that the Supreme Court case was never about the legality of Trump's automotive tariffs. Toyota Motor Corp. raised the same point in a company statement.

When Trump levied new import taxes last year on crucial auto industry products — finished motor vehicles, auto parts, steel and aluminum — he did so using more durable tariff authorities. The administration has maintained a general 25% duty rate on automotive goods since April, though that has fluctuated based on individual trade deals and partial exemptions on items from Canada and Mexico.

Tariffs affecting the highly integrated North American automotive supply chain are lower than rates on other major trade partners, but they still hover around 10% — up from virtually zero before Trump's return to Washington.

Those taxes have rankled supply chains and caused multibillion-dollar losses for automakers and suppliers, which tend to have tighter operating margins than the vehicle manufacturers they serve. Suppliers were also more directly impacted by the IEEPA tariffs as importers of raw materials and components that are later manufactured into auto parts.

MEMA, the vehicle suppliers' top lobbying group, praised the high court decision.

Spokesperson Meghan MacDonald said the organization "respects and welcomes the decision by the U.S. Supreme Court concerning the use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose tariffs."

"Throughout the past year, MEMA has worked constructively with policymakers to share data and real-world examples illustrating how these tariffs affected vehicle suppliers across the country. Suppliers operate within a deeply integrated North American supply chain, and policy changes of this scale have broad and complex implications for production, investment, and competitiveness," she added.

Alluding to the uncertainty ahead, however, MacDonald said that "it will be important to provide clarity and predictability for manufacturers of all sizes."

Unifor, Canada’s largest private sector union that represents Detroit Three autoworkers in that country, has been sharply critical of all of Trump’s tariff moves, but on Friday it wasn’t in a celebratory mood.

“This ruling exposes how abusive and legally flawed the IEEPA tariffs were, but Canadian workers should not mistake this for a victory,” Unifor National President Lana Payne said in a statement. “The risk to Canadian jobs remains severe, with the potential to even increase if Trump looks for new ways to impose tariffs or target Canadian jobs and investment.”

Unifor added that the ruling “does not end the U.S. trade war against Canada” when it comes to industry-specific tariffs, like autos, steel and wood products, as well as “other punishing measures.” The most damaging tariffs for the country weren’t the IEEPA tariffs impacted by Friday’s ruling anyway, Payne said.

On the U.S. side, the United Auto Workers didn’t have an immediate comment on the court decision.

The Detroit union has supported Trump’s aggressive use of tariffs in some areas, calling them a “powerful tool in the toolbox” that can force carmakers and other companies to bring jobs back to the United States. But UAW President Shawn Fain has criticized just how broadly Trump had implemented them and how they have been used for purposes not related to trade. Fain said recently they shouldn’t be used “for political games.”

Politicians weigh in

Reactions to the tariff news from Michigan politicians were split along party lines Friday. Democrats cheered the decision, and Republicans mostly sidestepped voicing their approval or disapproval of the ruling on Trump's controversial trade policies.

"President Trump has stood by his promise to ensure American workers and businesses aren’t getting ripped off by other countries. I will continue to work with the President to increase American manufacturing and restore a level playing field for Michigan workers, farmers, and business owners," Republican U.S. Rep. Lisa McClain of Michigan said in a statement.

"Over the past year, President Trump has sought to level the playing field, spur domestic investment, and put American workers first. We must create a free and fair trade agenda that supports hardworking Michiganders, small businesses, and farmers while also strengthening our global competitiveness,” Republican U.S. Rep. Tim Walberg of Michigan said.

Tom Barrett, R-Michigan, more directly acknowledged the ruling and the separation of powers issue central in the court's justification for striking down the tariffs.

"President Trump’s goal has always been to put America first and correct the decades-old trade imbalances that have crushed Michigan's workers and manufacturers while enriching the elite corporate class," Barrett said in a statement.

"Today’s Supreme Court decision did not change that mission, but it did reaffirm the role Congress must play in the process to reverse the damage caused by these lost opportunities," he added.

Democratic Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, who has previously supported tariffs deployed "like a scalpel, not a hammer," called the Friday ruling a "good step forward."

"The administration’s tariffs have driven up costs on cars, groceries, energy, and housing, causing massive uncertainty for families and businesses," she said in a statement. "Last year, America had its biggest manufacturing trade deficit ever, leading to job losses and production cuts. Now, the Supreme Court has ruled that a large swath of the administration’s tariffs are illegal."

Whitmer continued: "I’m hopeful that this decision will force Congress and the President to the table to work together on a more commonsense, strategic trade policy."

U.S. Rep. Debbie Dingell, D-Michigan, similarly suggested that lawmakers on Capitol Hill need to be brought into the discussion on trade policy.

"This ruling should be a moment for Congress and the Administration to work together on clear, targeted authorities grounded in law, so that we advance our industries globally," she wrote on social media.

Dingell, a longtime voice for the auto industry in Washington, also bashed how the president's tariffs were levied in the first place: "Trump’s tariffs were sold as a lifeline for manufacturing. Instead, they were a hidden tax on working families, squeezing small businesses and creating uncertainty, which only hurt our communities."

She added: "Tariffs are a tool in the toolbox, but they must be used strategically in ways that strengthen, not weaken, American manufacturing and supply chains."

©2026 www.detroitnews.com. Visit at detroitnews.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.