Press
The shadow of SCOTUS
Beyond the publicity stunts, it is now before the Supreme Court that a key part of the US economic strategy is being played out.
Nothing has been straightforward in the United States since the Trump administration's series of political ruptures, reversals, and experiments. Investors would be well advised to closely follow the developments in this legal saga over the coming months, not for the sake of drama, but because the decisions of the Supreme Court (SCOTUS) could profoundly reshape the American economic, commercial, and institutional landscape.
Let's dream for a moment. The hypothetical dismantling of the tariff wall would open the door to a more fluid economy, where every industrial sector, from Texas manufacturers to Detroit automakers, would regain ability to adjust and strategic visibility. Supply chains, weakened by years of decline, would regain efficiency and resilience. Freed from artificial costs, consumers would benefit from more open competition, while innovation would thrive in a less restrictive environment.
On the international stage, a confident return to multilateralism would signal renewed US commitment to restoring investor confidence and strengthening economic alliances. Even the institutional framework would become clearer, with Congress reaffirming its role in shaping trade policy. But let's be honest: this “optimistic” scenario is more wishful thinking than likely outcome.
Despite what optimists may say, the Supreme Court is now one of the institutional powerhouses of the Trump era. Its majority, shaped by the president's appointments, has strengthened an executive branch whose scope of action has expanded, sometimes to the detriment of a weakened Congress. Recent jurisprudence establishing quasi-presidential immunity for official acts has further concentrated power in the White House.
After validating Donald Trump's eligibility and limiting the scope of legal proceedings against him, the Court must now rule on several key issues such as customs duties, the independence of the Federal Reserve, and the power to dismiss senior officials. These are all issues that could permanently reshape the country's institutional balance and economic environment.
However, SCOTUS is not omnipotent: it does not legislate or enforce laws and depends on the cooperation of Congress and the executive branch, as well as public support, to implement its rulings. As guardian of the constitutional pact, it remains an arbiter, not a sovereign. Having unwittingly become a ‘kingmaker’, it can thus accentuate the country's divisions without being able to indefinitely support an administration's agenda.
The United States is currently applying the highest tariffs in a century, with taxes that are affecting foreign exporters, American companies and, ultimately, consumers. The revenue generated is substantial, without having yet reignited inflation or disrupted global production chains, but the dynamic could quickly become less favourable.
An international counter-offensive is already underway: the European Union is accelerating the conclusion of trade agreements, Brazil is strengthening its ties with Europe and China, India is stabilising its relationship with Beijing while reducing its dependence on the United States, and Saudi Arabia is multiplying its strategic options to protect itself from a possible US disengagement.
In this context, a SCOTUS block on tariffs would be a major setback for the Trump administration. The obligation to refund nearly $100 billion in collected duties would create significant legal uncertainty, while the loss of approximately $200 billion in annual revenue would force the Treasury to increase its debt issuance, putting additional pressure on US rates and weakening Washington's negotiating position with its key partners.
With midterm elections approaching, such a loss of credibility would be politically explosive and could lead foreign companies to postpone their industrial and infrastructure investments in the United States. Conversely, if the Supreme Court were to counter attempts to place the Fed under supervision, the monetary authority would emerge stronger, fears of rate manipulation would fade, and pressure on US consumers and importers would ease thanks to more competitive import prices.
The likelihood of a quick decision remains low, as SCOTUS proceeds at a pace of lengthy and nuanced deliberations. On customs duties, the executive branch still has leverage, but the line is cracking: Donald Trump has already cancelled several taxes he himself had imposed on food products in order to ease inflationary pressure and reduce the cost of living. This shift, which affects goods that the United States imports in large quantities, sends a signal of openness to certain partners and could support domestic demand while appeasing the controversy surrounding soaring prices.
November 28, 2025
Press
Press
US Debt: Understanding the Economic LeversOur Chief Investment Officer, Jean-Christophe Rochat, examines for Allnews the strategies the United States employs to manage its historic debt and their impact on global markets.
October 01, 2025
Press
Nvidia: Between Undisputed Dominance and Rising CompetitionNvidia remains the leader in the AI-driven semiconductor market, despite increasingly organized competition.
September 04, 2025
Press
US pressure: Swiss neutrality put to the testUnder pressure from Washington, Switzerland’s neutrality is being challenged and its industries are being weakened.
September 03, 2025