Section 122 Tariffs Struck Down. So What?

Letter to the Editor

Here’s a letter I sent to the Washington Post last week:

Dear Editor,

Your analysis of the Section 122 ruling is exactly right (”Trump’s Tariff Agenda Takes Another Hit,” May 7, 2026). However, it misses the largest cost that will impact our wallets for years to come: the damage to our reputation on the world stage.

Every time the administration reaches for a tariff statute, loses, and then reaches for another, trading partners around the world take note. The message they’re receiving is not that our courts are in the way, it’s that this White House will not stop until it get what they want.

Rational trading partners will not wait around for that fight to resolve. They diversify, building trading relationships, supply chain alliances, and institutional frameworks that do not depend on Washington’s reliability. When Canada’s Prime Minister publicly described China as “more predictable,” the reglobalization around the US had already begun.

Courts can strike down tariff statutes time and again. They cannot restore trust on the world stage. That bill is coming due and unlike tariffs, there’s no mechanism for a refund.

David Hebert
Senior Research Fellow
American Institute for Economic Research

For a more detailed analysis, check out The Daily Economy this Friday (though you should really read it every day but I’m biased) for a longer discussion of the USITC court case, its ruling, and the likely next steps that will come from the White House.