Trump Slams ‘Low IQ’ Jeffries After ‘Wannabe King’ Insult

In a major ruling that reshapes the ongoing debate over executive authority and trade policy, the Supreme Court on Friday issued a 6-3 decision limiting President Donald J. Trump’s use of emergency powers to impose sweeping global tariffs under a 1977 statute.

The Court held that the president exceeded his authority when he relied on the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to implement broad-based tariffs, concluding that the law — designed to address national emergencies — does not clearly authorize the unilateral imposition of tariffs of such scale. The ruling invalidates tariffs enacted under IEEPA but leaves untouched other trade measures implemented under separate statutory authorities.

Trump Fires Back at Critics

The decision immediately sparked sharp reactions in Washington.

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries celebrated the ruling on X, calling the rejection of what he described as “harmful Trump Tariffs” “a big victory for the American people.” Jeffries has previously branded the president a “wannabe King,” rhetoric that reflects the increasingly heated tone of the debate over executive power.

President Trump did not mince words when asked about Jeffries’ comments during a press conference.

“I would call him a low IQ. He doesn’t even know, and I watched him the other day interview. The guy doesn’t even know what a tariff is,” Trump said.

When a reporter suggested that opposition to the tariffs had been bipartisan and asked why the administration would not pursue a legislative solution through Congress, the president pushed back firmly.

“No, not bipartisan. Excuse me, a few people—” Trump said, acknowledging some Republican defections but emphasizing that the party remains largely united behind his trade agenda.

Pressed further, Trump dismissed the need for congressional collaboration.

“I don’t have to,” Trump said. “I have the right to do tariffs, and I’ve always had the right to do tariffs. And it’s all been approved by Congress, so there’s no reason to do it.”

The president also characterized the ruling as “deeply disappointing” and said he was “ashamed” of some of the justices. He went further, calling the decision “very unpatriotic and disloyal to our Constitution,” arguing that it improperly constrains the executive branch in defending American economic interests.

Writing for the majority, Chief Justice John Roberts stated that President Trump had claimed “extraordinary power to unilaterally impose tariffs of unlimited amount, duration and scope,” yet failed to identify statutory language clearly authorizing IEEPA to be used in that manner. The Court ultimately concluded that Congress did not grant such sweeping tariff authority through the emergency statute.

In dissent, Justice Brett Kavanaugh signaled that the practical consequences of the ruling may be less dramatic than critics suggest. He wrote that the decision likely would not meaningfully curtail presidential tariff authority in the long run but cautioned that it could create a “mess” for the federal government, including the prospect of billions of dollars in refunds owed to businesses that paid tariffs under IEEPA.

Rather than retreat, the president announced an immediate shift in legal strategy.

Trump said he will invoke Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, which permits the president to impose tariffs of up to 15% for 150 days under specified conditions. Under that authority, he plans to move forward with a temporary 10% global tariff.

The administration also emphasized that tariffs enacted under other statutory frameworks remain fully in force. Officials signaled they are exploring additional legal avenues to ensure continuity in the president’s broader trade policy, underscoring that the Court’s ruling was narrow and did not eliminate executive tariff authority altogether.

Reaction across Washington was predictably divided. Democrats and some Republicans framed the ruling as a reaffirmation of congressional authority over trade and a reinforcement of separation-of-powers principles.

Other GOP lawmakers, however, pledged to work alongside the administration to reestablish tariff measures through alternative legal channels, signaling that the president’s America-first trade posture remains influential within the party.

Small-business groups welcomed the decision and called for clarity regarding potential refunds for duties already collected. Meanwhile, several foreign trading partners responded cautiously, reviewing the implications of the ruling while stressing the need for economic stability and predictability.

The ruling sets the stage for an intensified legal and political struggle over the scope of presidential authority in trade matters — a fight that strikes at the heart of constitutional design, economic sovereignty, and the balance of power between Congress and the executive branch.

And if Friday’s response is any indication, President Trump has no intention of abandoning his broader tariff agenda.