Investor Kevin O'Leary isn't buying the narrative that the Supreme Court is about to handcuff President Donald Trump on tariffs. Speaking on Fox Business' "Mornings With Maria" Thursday, he made his position clear: "the executive needs the authority to set trade policy, whoever is in office."
Why Limiting Presidential Trade Power Would Be 'Dangerous'
O'Leary's take is that while people can "debate the tariff levels themselves," stripping away presidential control entirely "is a dangerous precedent" that would "create chaos in global trade and undermine our ability to respond to real economic threats."
The Shark Tank personality pointed out that "there are plenty of constitutional tools available if SCOTUS ever pushed back," though he doesn't think it'll come to that. His reasoning? The country faces immediate challenges like fentanyl trafficking, border security issues, and fierce global competition. In that environment, he argues, stability in trade policy beats constitutional uncertainty.
The Counterargument: It's About Taxation Without Representation
Not everyone shares O'Leary's confidence. Former White House Communications Director Anthony Scaramucci puts the odds at 70% that the Supreme Court will vote to eliminate Trump's tariffs.
His logic hinges on a fundamental constitutional principle: Trump doesn't have the "authority" to impose tariffs because they're effectively a tax, and only Congress can impose taxes. Otherwise, you've got taxation without representation, which didn't work out too well the first time around.
The Administration Has a Backup Plan
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent seems unbothered by the legal uncertainty. Last week, he expressed confidence that tariff policies will continue regardless of what the Supreme Court decides.
"We can recreate the exact tariff structure with [sections] 301, with 232, with 122," Bessent said, citing various provisions of the 1962 Trade Act that grant the President considerable authority over import duties. That's the administration's Plan B if the Court strikes down tariffs currently imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977.
So even if the legal pathway changes, the destination might remain the same.