Major U.S. think tanks said the White House lost its core negotiating lever—speed—after the Supreme Court nullified tariffs. They said the era of the Trump administration's favored immediate, unilateral tariff threats is fading, ushering in a new phase dominated by complex legal procedures and institutional fights. The Trump administration is dredging up mothballed statutes and pulling the global trade order into institutional uncertainty. Because of this, trade experts said that while the world dodged an imminent tariff bomb, the global economy has entered a tighter web of U.S.-driven regulation.
On the 23rd (local time), the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), a think tank focused on U.S. foreign policy and international relations, pointed to "loss of speed" as the most painful blow to the Trump administration from the ruling. CFR fellow Ryu Zongyuan said, "For threats to work in economic diplomacy, their effects must be credible, fast, and capable of immediate escalation in damage, and this Supreme Court ruling has reduced that flexibility."
With a summit with China's President Xi Jinping coming in April, the White House heads to the table having lost one of its strongest weapons. Ryu said, "China's leadership will see this ruling as a tactical edge," and "will choose tactics that delay implementation of any deal." China's leadership has gained a pretext to intensify its messaging by arguing that U.S. economic sanctions are not only internationally controversial but also illegal even within the United States.
Experts also said Section 122 of the Trade Act, which the Trump administration reached for as a stopgap immediately after the tariff nullification ruling, rests on logic that does not fit reality. Kimberly Clausing and Maurice Obstfeld of the Peterson Institute for International Economics (PIIE) criticized that invoking this clause requires the United States to be in a "serious balance of payments deficit," which is far from the current structure of the U.S. economy.
For more than 50 years, the United States has maintained a floating exchange rate system, leaving the dollar's value to the market. As the dollar rises and falls, export and import volumes naturally adjust. PIIE said, "It is hard to apply the old crisis concept from the fixed exchange rate era, when exchange rates were held in place, to today." The researchers also noted that the recent dollar weakness "does not stem from an inability to borrow abroad, but is the result of policy confusion from frequently changing tariffs and pressure on the Federal Reserve to cut rates, which has stoked market anxiety."
The "nondiscrimination" built into Section 122 is seen as another snare hobbling a White House that has negotiated country by country. The law must be applied uniformly to all countries worldwide. Striking transactions with individual countries is far harder than prior one-on-one negotiations. PIIE researchers projected, "Countries that were previously squeezed into deals by the threat of steep tariffs will now delay implementation or demand renegotiation." In fact, the British government is already gearing up to secure a special exemption for itself.
In the end, experts said the 150-day Section 122 tariff is merely a temporary bridge to buy time for stronger measures. CFR senior fellow Jennifer Hillman predicted the administration will use this period to push broadly for investigations under Section 301, targeting unfair trade, and Section 232, citing national security. Ryu Zongyuan warned that even Section 338 of the 1930 Customs Act, unused for nearly 80 years since 1949, could be revived. The view is that the trade war has not eased in its essence of geopolitical rivalry and industrial policy clashes; it has only become professionalized as a regulatory match fought within legal bounds, rather than an impromptu duel.
The judicial hammer is expected to unleash a massive aftershock across U.S. industry. Hillman said importers clearly have the right under the Constitution to seek refunds, including interest, on tariffs that have been nullified. But it typically takes 314 days for Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to finalize an import entry. If a flood of paperwork hits on top of that, severe administrative delays are likely before any actual refunds. PIIE researchers criticized that "as trade policy uncertainty drags on, an uneven playing field has formed where large corporations with strong lobbying power secure exemptions, while small and midsize firms without connections are left to shoulder the expense."
There are also ominous predictions that a president who has lost key economic powers will look outside the United States for a way to break through the crisis. Wall Street Journal (WSJ) columnist Walter Russell Mead warned, "Limits on trade authority and falling approval ratings will spur President Trump to seek a new lever that captures the world's attention." In other words, tensions could be artificially escalated to divert attention. Experts said a range of wild cards that could showcase American power remain in play, including a large-scale military action targeting Iran, physical clashes with Mexican drug cartels, and the seizure of a Russian oil tanker attempting to breach the Cuba blockade.