What is the probability that the Supreme Court of the United States will overturn president Trump's tariffs?
### Background on the Case
The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments on November 5, 2025, in consolidated cases (*V.O.S. Selections, Inc. v. Trump* and *Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump*) challenging President Donald Trump's "Liberation Day" tariffs and related "fentanyl" tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) of 1977. These tariffs—ranging from 10% to 50% on imports from over 100 countries—were justified by Trump as responses to trade deficits and fentanyl flows, but lower courts (U.S. Court of International Trade and Federal Circuit) ruled them unlawful, finding IEEPA does not authorize broad tariffs, which encroach on Congress's constitutional taxing power. The administration has collected ~$88 billion so far, with projections of $1.8 trillion over a decade if upheld. A ruling is expected by late December 2025 or early 2026, potentially requiring refunds and disrupting trade deals.
### Probability Assessment
No definitive probability exists, as SCOTUS rulings are not quantifiable with certainty, but expert analyses, legal commentary, and prediction markets provide informed estimates. Based on post-argument sentiment, the court appears skeptical, with a majority of justices (including conservatives like Roberts and Barrett) questioning the tariffs' scope and IEEPA's applicability. Prediction markets, which aggregate trader bets and often outperform polls in forecasting, now price in a **70-76% chance** the court will overturn the tariffs (i.e., rule against the administration, invalidating them under IEEPA). This reflects a sharp post-argument drop from ~45-50% odds of upholding them pre-hearing.
- **Prediction Markets (as of November 19, 2025)**:
- **Kalshi**: 76% chance of striking down (24% uphold).
- **Polymarket**: 76% chance of striking down (24% uphold).
- **PredictIt**: ~70% chance of invalidating (30% uphold).
- Trading volumes exceed $2 million across platforms, indicating strong market conviction.
- **Expert and Analyst Views**:
- JPMorgan trade/legal experts: 70-80% chance of ruling against.
- SCOTUSblog: Court "appears dubious," with potential 5-4 or 6-3 split against (Roberts/Barrett joining liberals).
- Public polls (YouGov/Economist, Nov. 15-17): Only 25% of Americans expect overturn (42% expect uphold), but 49% believe it *should* be overturned—highlighting partisan divides (e.g., 85% Democrats vs. 14% Republicans favor striking down).
| Source Type | Probability of Overturn | Key Rationale |
|----------------------|--------------------------|---------------|
| Prediction Markets (Kalshi/Polymarket) | 76% | Post-argument skepticism from swing justices; markets react to oral cues. |
| JPMorgan Experts | 70-80% | IEEPA lacks "tariff" language; violates non-delegation/major questions doctrines. |
| SCOTUS Analysts (e.g., Politico, NPR) | 60-75% | Conservative split likely; echoes student debt ruling but with stronger separation-of-powers concerns. |
| Public Expectation (YouGov) | 25% (low confidence) | Optimism bias for status quo; ignores legal merits. |
### Potential Outcomes and Implications
- **If Overturned (High Likelihood)**: Tariffs vacated; ~$88B+ refunds to importers (passed to consumers via class actions); prices drop (e.g., 55-70% of costs borne by households per Goldman Sachs); GDP boost of 0.4-0.5% and 400K+ jobs. Trump could reimpose via Section 301/232 (e.g., on steel/autos), but slower process invites more challenges. Trade deals (e.g., EU $600B investment) may unravel.
- **If Upheld (Low Likelihood)**: Validates expansive executive power; enables future "emergency" tariffs; sustains $1.8T revenue but risks inflation ($1,000-1,300/household annually) and retaliation.
- **Partial Ruling**: Possible narrow win (e.g., uphold fentanyl-specific but strike reciprocal tariffs), but experts see this as unlikely given unified questioning.
This assessment draws from the conservative-majority court's recent restraint on executive overreach (e.g., Biden's student loans) and IEEPA's 50-year history without tariff use. While Trump's appointees (Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Barrett) lean deferential on foreign policy, economic/taxing concerns may prevail. Updates could shift odds if leaks emerge.
www.dailymail.co.uk
