Supreme Court Rules Against Most of Trump’s Tariffs | China in Focus

Welcome to China In Focus. I'm Tiffany Meyer. Our top story, a major setback for President Trump's trade strategy. The U.S. Supreme Court has struck down most of his tariffs, but part of the tariffs imposed on China will remain. What this means for U.S. trade and the president's response. Today I will sign an order to impose a 10% global tariff under section 122. Over and above our normal tariffs already being charged. American and Chinese fighter jets briefly facing off near China this week of what triggered the encounter. The Japanese prime minister is warning of growing Chinese coercion, more on her plans to overhaul Japan's defense strategy and deepen ties with the U.S. And Olympic star Aileen Gu is pushing back at Vice President J.D. Vance. She explains why she's representing China despite being an American and why critics are speaking out. A major blow to President Trump's economic policy. The Supreme Court is ruling against most of Trump's tariffs on Friday. Trump is fighting back, saying he can't charge much more than he was charging. Watch. Today I will sign an order to impose a 10% global tariff under section 122. Over and above our normal tariffs already being charged. And we're also initiating several section 301 and other investigations to protect our country from unfair trading practices of other countries and companies. The president has been using the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to implement tariffs. This law allows presidents to regulate imports during times of emergency. Trump has argued that the influx of illegal drugs from China, Canada and Mexico and the huge trade deficits are both emergencies. The justices ruled six to three that the law doesn't authorize the president to impose tariffs. Justices ruling against the tariffs include John Roberts, Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett. The ruling affects the president's country by country reciprocal tariffs and the 25% tariffs on China, Canada and Mexico over illegal drugs. Trump's tariffs on steel and aluminum, which he imposed using different laws, are not affected. Another authority that the administration has been using to impose tariffs on a sectoral basis or on specific products. This is called section 232 and it was actually used back in the first Trump administration to impose tariffs on steel and aluminum. And in this administration it's been expanded to autos, copper, certain wood products and other sectors as well. In addition, there are tariffs imposed under what we call section 301. There's lots of numbers and acronyms, which again was used in the first Trump administration to impose tariffs on China. And those tariffs also remain and that authority is not impacted by this decision. In the major Supreme Court tariffs ruling, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote that the government's interpretation of the law would give the president unbounded authority to impose and change tariffs. He said that would represent a major expansion of presidential power over tariff policy. Roberts said that in the 50 years since the law was passed, no president had ever used it to impose tariffs on this scale. He said the lack of president suggests the tariffs go beyond the president's authority. However, Justice Clarence Thomas argued that the law and constitution do not justify blocking the president's tariffs. He wrote that the court has long recognized Congress can give the president broad discretion over trade and commerce with other nations. In the majority opinion, the six justices of the Trump administration may be required to refund billions of dollars to importers who have paid the International Emergency Economic Powers Act tariffs. The Supreme Court also acknowledged that the refund process is likely to be a mess. Trump said it could take years to litigate any tariff refunds. The Supreme Court didn't explain who is eligible for for refunds or how this order will be implemented. It's leaving that to the lower courts. And so this will go back ultimately to the Court of International Trade to describe the relief and put this opinion into action. White House officials say they could use other measures to carry out President Trump's tariff agenda. National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett told CNBC's Squawk on the street in January that there are other legal authorities to reach the same place. He said these could be used instead of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. Treasury Secretary Scott Besant also referenced a plan B to recreate the exact tariff structure. A rare confrontation U.S. and Chinese fighter jets briefly faced off near China this week, according to South Korean media. About 10 U.S. jets left a South Korean base on Wednesday for drills between China and South Korea. They didn't enter China's air defense zone, but Beijing scrambled planes as they approached. An air defense zone isn't part of a country's territory, but planes must identify themselves when entering. China has been stepping up military pressure across the Indo-Pacific, fueled by ongoing territorial disputes in the South China Sea and over self-ruled Taiwan. In December, Japan accused a Chinese fighter jet of locking its radar onto Japanese planes. Japan's Prime Minister sounding the alarm on China in her first post-election speech to Parliament, Sanae Takeuchi warned of what she called growing Chinese coercion. She says Japan is facing its toughest security environment since World War II, pointing to Beijing's expanding military activity in the East and South China Seas. She also cited China's closer ties with Russia and warned about North Korea's nuclear missile program. Her message was clear. Japan must adapt. Takeuchi pledged to overhaul the country's defense strategy and ease restrictions on military exports. Right now, Japan exports non-lethal equipment like body armor, but a policy panel from her party is proposing broader rules. This would allow Japanese firms to sell a wider range of defense equipment overseas. Takeuchi also promised to strengthen critical supply chains. Her tough stance follows months of tension with Beijing. Last year, she said Japan could use military force if an attack on Taiwan also threatened Japanese territory. And earlier this week, Takeuchi said she hoped to deepen the U.S.-Japan relations in many ways when she visits Washington next month. As for the upcoming Japan-U.S. summit, I would like to not only further enhance the trust with President Donald Trump, but also strengthen Japan-U.S. relations in various fields such as national security, economy and culture. Additionally, I am determined to enhance Japan-U.S. economic security, including critical minerals such as rare earths. Takeuchi won a landslide election last week, gaining more influence in parliament to advance her policies. Winter Olympics star Aileen Gu is pushing back at Vice President J.D. Vance after he questioned her decision to compete for China instead of the U.S. In a recent Fox News interview, Vance said he would hope that someone who grew up in the U.S. and benefited from its freedoms would want to represent Team USA. Gu responded Thursday with sarcasm, saying she was flattered by the comments. She added that many athletes compete for countries outside of where they're born and believes criticism of her comes from broader tensions with China. But many continue to raise concerns about China's human rights abuses. Here's Arthur Liu, father of Olympic gold medalist Alyssa Liu, weighing in. I continue to raise concerns about the human rights violations in China, the government's persecution of the Uyghurs and also the political dissidents. A lot of the political dissidents were imprisoned in China, so I continue to organize such protests and I want people to become aware of what's going on in China and I really wanted the Chinese government to change, to respect basic human rights in China. Aileen Gu, who was born a U.S. citizen in California, has represented China since the 2022 Winter Games. It's a decision that continues to spark debate from human rights activists. Financial disclosures show she earned through endorsements with both Western luxury brands and Chinese companies. Earlier reports also say Beijing officials provided millions in training support ahead of the 2026 Milan Winter Olympics. According to the Wall Street Journal last week, Gu and another American-born skater were paid a combined $6.6 million in 2025 for Olympic qualification efforts. That brings their reported total compensation over the past three years to nearly $14 million. Thousands of American science and math graduates could soon be heading overseas under a new Trump administration initiative. The program called the Tech Corps would fall under the Peace Corps. It will deploy up to 5,000 volunteers and advisors over the next five years. The goal is to help partner nations adopt American-made AI tools and steer them away from Chinese alternatives. Officials say it's part of a broader effort to win the global AI race and expand U.S. tech exports. It also reflects a shift in mission for the Peace Corps, which was founded in 1961 during the Cold War as a goodwill diplomacy effort. The Tech Corps would focus on countries that don't yet have strong AI infrastructure in place. Funding is expected to come from congressional support, corporations and charity groups, with senior experts helping guide volunteers both on the ground and remotely. Staying on Washington's AI push, Taiwan has overtaken China as the U.S.'s top source of tech imports for the first time in decades. A Friday Commerce Department report shows imports from China fell 44 percent, or roughly $21 billion in December. Meanwhile, shipments from Taiwan more than doubled to around $25 billion, fueled by a growing demand for AI chips and servers. The shift highlights Taiwan's growing role in the global tech economy, boosted by a new trade deal and strong AI-driven growth. Now, almost a third of the island nation's exports go to the U.S. Earlier this month, Taiwan raised its 2025 GDP forecast to over 7.7 percent. Coming up, President Trump says Washington will provide funding to strengthen the United Nations at the first Board of Peace meeting. But what happens if China is involved? A geopolitical analyst weighs in. I'm an advocate personally that the United States defund itself from the United Nations and leave. More on that after the break here on China In Focus. Welcome back to China In Focus. I'm Tiffany Meyer. Joining us now to react to President Trump's first Board of Peace meeting is retired Lieutenant Colonel Darren Gobb. He's a geopolitical strategist who served as a Black Hawk helicopter pilot and battalion commander in the U.S. Army. Darren, thank you so much for joining us. Great to have you here again. Now, Trump announcing the U.S. $10 billion commitment to the board. Now, given that this sprang from the 20-point Gaza peace plan, what's next here? How effectively can the Board of Peace enforce and sustain the ceasefire? Yeah, I think this is untested water, Tiffany. So there's a lot of people going to be asking that question, including myself. So the Board of Peace essentially becomes an international body that's not sanctioned as much as something like the United Nations or NATO would be concerned. And this is a bit of an experiment. So you're getting a very good coalition of the willing together saying we need to solve the Gaza problem. And the two-state solution is not that solution. It never has been. And they're willing to put some money towards it. Now, I'm not a big fan of us giving any money towards this because we've got plenty of other things to do. We fund the U.N. by and large. I don't think American taxpayer dollars should go towards essentially what becomes nation building again. However, the difference in this particular case is that the U.N. directly is not involved. So it could actually work out. It could be a lot better than that because we know the U.N. is dysfunctional. Can the Board of Peace get past that kind of dysfunctionality and actually do something productive for the world in general, but in the Middle East specifically, and do something with Gaza that makes a real difference? That remains to be seen. But you don't know until you try. Speaking of the Middle East, Trump also announced that he plans to name his son-in-law, Jared Kushner, as a special peace envoy. How do you see that and the board's actions more broadly affecting other Middle East flashpoints? Well, I think Jared Kushner is quickly learning the things that some of us have lived for 30 years or more. So the international community and all these different relationships, it's not really something he's had a background in. So I'm sure they'll continue to see Jared Kushner for what he is, which is an extension of Donald J. Trump. And how they react to that will be key. And it's going to be more about his ability to bend the ear of Trump than it is anything else. So, you know, I think, again, what you're seeing is Trump trying to do the best he can to pick somebody that he thinks he can trust, regardless of whether or not they've had any background or experience in doing the things he did. And we hope him the best and hope it works out for sure, because there's a large portion of the earth and a large population that can be affected positively if we can bring a true, lasting peace to the Middle East. In terms of board members, why do you think major U.S. allies, the U.K., Canada, France, Germany, much of Europe, have refused to join, giving various reasons. Will this impact the credibility or the potential impact of the board? I don't think so, ultimately, because we're talking mostly about, you know, some European nations that have made their stances clear through votes in the United Nations against Israel specifically. But again, this is a board that is made up of nations that are willing to come on and be part of a solution. At least that's what they're saying. And they're willing to actually put money towards the rebuilding of Gaza, too. That actually gives it the credibility it needs, because this is, it's something new, and they're putting money towards it. So it costs something. What we have to be careful of is that it doesn't turn into another international, regardless of the type, that's infiltrated by those who might try to put people in place who are sympathetic to the Palestinian Liberation Organization or any of those types of organizations in order to influence its effectiveness and turn it into something that shouldn't be. So credibility, initially good. The results will matter. I'm going to go back to your earlier point about the United Nations. As Trump has criticized the UN, saying it hasn't fulfilled its potential in resolving conflicts, but said today that he would fund it to make it stronger, and that the new board would ensure it lives up to its full potential. Can't this be the case if China, the second biggest funder of the UN, is involved? I don't think so. China is ultimately going to be an adversary by their own choosing for a very long time. There's no doubt about that. And that's unfortunate because it could be so much better. It's a typical communist party who sees the Western world as its enemy. In some cases, that might be legitimate. In some cases, in most cases, it is not. So I'm an advocate personally that the United States defund itself from the United Nations and leave and have the United Nations move somewhere else. I'll put that out there now. So I don't trust that body inherently. In essence, the UN is ineffective. And when it comes to trying to keep peace in the Middle East, it's like they've been working against that entire objective in the first place. So we need to watch this body, this board of peace and see if they can act something that the UN seems to have been working again a long time. And at the meeting today, Trump also issued a warning to Tehran saying if a deal isn't reached in the next 10 days, bad things will happen. Now his warning comes on the heels of a massive military buildup around Iran. How are you reading this? Are we close to war breaking out? It's hard not to read this and think back through a little bit of history and go back to around the end of 2017 and beginning of 2018 when Trump was basically doing the same thing against North Korea. The difference with Trump is one, he's going to move everything he has to to make sure that all those pieces are in place should he choose to use them and Congress authorize its use. And he did the same thing with Korea. And ultimately with North Korea, we never had to use those. But he is never going to enter into negotiations of this kind and threaten military action without moving things like the Navy forces that we've all seen close to Iran to make sure that they know that he's serious. I don't think he wants to strike Iran. I truly think he wants a deal and wants peace. But he's not going to threaten the use of force on anything without having those pieces in place to make it look and potentially even be real. A lot to watch here for sure. Darren Gov, as always, thank you so much for joining us. Thanks, Kim. The U.S. and Indonesia have signed a reciprocal trade agreement. Washington will maintain the 19 percent tariff on goods exported by the Southeast Asian country. Indonesia and the U.S. have signed a new trade deal with Washington maintaining the 19 percent tariff on goods exported by the Southeast Asian country. Jakarta said Indonesian coffee, chocolate, natural rubber and spices would be tariff-free. It also won an exemption for its top export, palm oil, which accounts for almost 10 percent of the country's overseas shipments. Textile products from Indonesia will be subject to a zero percent levy under a tariff rate quota mechanism that is yet to be finalized. Washington last year agreed to lower the duty on Indonesia's exports to the United States to 19 percent, down from an initial 32 percent. During the negotiations on the new deal, the U.S. agreed to drop its requests to add non-economic provisions to the deal, but that includes those related to nuclear reactor development and the South China Sea. According to a White House fact sheet about the agreement, Indonesia will remove tariff barriers on most U.S. products. It will also address a range of non-tariff barriers, such as local consent requirements. Jakarta will also accept U.S. product standards on vehicle safety, emissions, medical devices and pharmaceuticals. Indonesia will also allow and facilitate U.S. investment in critical minerals and energy resources. The deal takes effect 90 days after both sides complete the related legal procedures. Indonesian President Prabowo Subianto traveled to Washington for the agreement, and to attend the first leaders' meeting of U.S. President Donald Trump's Board of Peace. Former South Korean President Yun Suk-kyo was sentenced to life in prison, a three-judge panel convicting him of orchestrating an insurrection. His supporters flooding the streets, lawyers weighing an appeal, and history suggesting this may not be the final chapter. NTD's Washington correspondent Jack Bradley has more. Former South Korean President Yun Suk-kyo sentenced to life behind bars. A court finding the 65-year-old guilty of abuse of authority and orchestrating an insurrection tied to his failed attempt to impose martial law in December 2024. Outside the courtroom, hundreds of his supporters rallying, holding Yun again banners, chanting his name. Given how much the rule of law has eroded the Republic of Korea, we had hoped for an acquittal, but we see today's result as a challenge our country now has to work through. The three-judge panel concluding Yun subverted the constitution by deploying troops to the National Assembly to halt parliamentary activity. Yun denying the charges, claiming he was acting within his presidential authority, accusing the opposition, which controls parliament, of being sympathetic to communists and North Korea. Seven other defendants sentenced alongside him, including his defense minister and top police officials. Yun's lawyers now saying they'll discuss whether to appeal. Watching what appears to be a collapse of the rule of law today, I'm compelled to question whether we should proceed with an appeal or continue to participate in these criminal proceedings at all. Now if history's taught us anything, this may not be the end. Four former South Korean presidents have received lengthy prison sentences over the past 30 years, one even sentenced to death. All of them were eventually pardoned, and several pardoned after just five years, one after only two years. For now, Yun's expected to remain at the Seoul Detention Center. Now lawyers say an appeal could come soon, and with this precedent on his side, the possibility of a pardon in the coming years remains very real. Reporting from Washington, D.C., Jack Bradley, NTD News. That's all for today's China In Focus. I'm Tiffany Meyer. If you have any feedback on the show or have something you'd like to see us cover, send us an email at chinainfocus and ntd.com. We'd love to hear from you. For on-the-clock original news coverage, visit us at ntd.com or download our NTD app. Thanks for watching. See you soon.