Tomorrow is a critical moment—on January 9, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court will rule on the Trump administration's tariff policies. This is not just a legal issue; for the global investment market, it is a true turning point.
The origin of the matter is actually quite simple: the Trump administration used the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose tariffs on a large scale, which resulted in collective lawsuits from over a thousand companies. The core issue boils down to one question—can the President arbitrarily use tariff powers without Congressional approval?
Recent analysis reports from Morgan Stanley offer an interesting prediction. They believe the Supreme Court will not give a clear-cut answer. Instead, the court is likely to "walk a tightrope"—limiting the scope of IEEPA in tariffs but not completely abolishing this tool. What does this mean? The Trump administration will probably turn to other channels, such as Section 232 (National Security Tariffs) and Section 301 (Intellectual Property Rights) to maintain the current high tariff levels.
In other words, this is not a big victory for Trump, nor is it a crushing defeat. Morgan Stanley's report explicitly states: "The Supreme Court has significant discretion to narrow the scope of current tariffs or restrict future applications, but it is unlikely to mandate the cancellation of these tariffs."
For investors, this signals an important message—the government’s tariff policy framework remains largely stable, and the risk of refunds will be minimized. For traders with global market exposure, this ruling may not cause significant volatility; instead, it represents a relatively clear policy certainty moment.
View Original
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
11 Likes
Reward
11
5
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
ChainDetective
· 01-11 07:41
See you tomorrow for the showdown. The issue of tariffs isn't as absolute as it seems.
Why do I feel like Morgan Stanley is basically saying: it's probably going to be a dead end.
Wait, can the reasons 232, 301 for national security really cover everything? It feels like a new round of bargaining is about to start.
The key is how the market reacts—that's where the profit opportunities are.
Stability ≠ no opportunity. Brothers, stay optimistic!
View OriginalReply0
LiquidityWitch
· 01-10 10:13
Morgan Stanley's "Balance Beam" theory sounds like the courts are just doing Tai Chi, with Trump changing laws to continue imposing tariffs.
Honestly, that's overthinking it. Who do you think this judge's decision will satisfy?
This policy framework is unstable; a single shift tomorrow could cause a total flip.
This round, it all depends on who has the thicker chips.
Tariffs are always driven by politics first, with laws coming second.
View OriginalReply0
TopBuyerBottomSeller
· 01-08 08:54
Hi, I am very familiar with this operation routine, just a different disguise.
Trump is just playing this set, the court's "balance" result still keeps tariffs in place, right?
Morgan Stanley is starting to sing to institutions again, retail investors, let's not follow the trend.
Clauses like 232 and 301 have been there all along, basically just different names.
"Policy certainty"? To me, it looks like certain to cut the leeks.
See you tomorrow, it's another show of oscillation and shakeout.
View OriginalReply0
ETHReserveBank
· 01-08 08:40
It's another kind of win-win judgment; in the end, you still have to pay taxes.
View OriginalReply0
LiquidatedNotStirred
· 01-08 08:33
Morgan Stanley is playing the balancing act again; in the end, they still have to rely on 232 and 301 to survive.
Tomorrow is a critical moment—on January 9, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court will rule on the Trump administration's tariff policies. This is not just a legal issue; for the global investment market, it is a true turning point.
The origin of the matter is actually quite simple: the Trump administration used the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose tariffs on a large scale, which resulted in collective lawsuits from over a thousand companies. The core issue boils down to one question—can the President arbitrarily use tariff powers without Congressional approval?
Recent analysis reports from Morgan Stanley offer an interesting prediction. They believe the Supreme Court will not give a clear-cut answer. Instead, the court is likely to "walk a tightrope"—limiting the scope of IEEPA in tariffs but not completely abolishing this tool. What does this mean? The Trump administration will probably turn to other channels, such as Section 232 (National Security Tariffs) and Section 301 (Intellectual Property Rights) to maintain the current high tariff levels.
In other words, this is not a big victory for Trump, nor is it a crushing defeat. Morgan Stanley's report explicitly states: "The Supreme Court has significant discretion to narrow the scope of current tariffs or restrict future applications, but it is unlikely to mandate the cancellation of these tariffs."
For investors, this signals an important message—the government’s tariff policy framework remains largely stable, and the risk of refunds will be minimized. For traders with global market exposure, this ruling may not cause significant volatility; instead, it represents a relatively clear policy certainty moment.