Should the administration lose the Supreme Court case, it might shift to product-specific tariffs. This transition could introduce short-term market volatility, as the administration might initially propose high tariff levels as a negotiating tactic before settling on lower, more palatable rates.

Even if the Supreme Court rules against the administration, it may not change U.S. tariff levels. The executive branch has alternative legal authorities, like Section 301, that it can use to maintain the same tariffs, making a court defeat less of a market-moving event than it appears.

Stocks most affected by tariffs showed a muted reaction to a pending Supreme Court decision. This suggests investors believe the executive branch could use other authorities to maintain tariffs and that any potential refunds from an overturn would take years to materialize, diminishing the news's immediate market impact.

While the base case is that the President would replace tariffs struck down by the Supreme Court, there's a growing possibility he won't. The administration could use the ruling as a politically convenient way to reduce tariffs and address voter concerns about affordability without appearing to back down on trade policy.

The legal battle over President Trump's tariffs and President Biden's student loan forgiveness both hinge on the "major questions doctrine." This Supreme Court principle asserts that if the executive branch exercises a power with vast economic and political impact based on ambiguous statutory language, the Court will rule against it, demanding explicit authorization from Congress.

Unlike previous administrations that used trade policy for domestic economic goals, Trump's approach is distinguished by his willingness to wield tariffs as a broad geopolitical weapon against allies and adversaries alike, from Canada to India.

The impending 107% tariff on Italian pasta is based on legally sound anti-dumping laws targeting a specific product. This is distinct from Trump's broader, country-specific tariffs, which were enacted via a national emergency declaration and are more likely to be struck down by the Supreme Court. This signals a key legal risk difference for global businesses.

Contrary to popular belief, Trump's trade strategy isn't protectionism. He uses reciprocity, leverage, and executive flexibility to force other countries to lower their own trade barriers, ultimately aiming for a world with freer trade for the U.S.

Despite expected legislative gridlock, investors should focus on the executive branch. The president's most impactful market tools, such as tariff policy and deregulation via executive agencies, do not require congressional approval. Significant policy shifts can therefore occur even when Congress is divided and inactive.