Biazzo Law Applauds U.S. Supreme Court Decision Reinforcing Constitution’s Separation of Powers in Landmark Tariffs Case
Updated: Jul 23
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Charlotte, NC — 02/20/26 — Biazzo Law, PLLC today praised the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Learning Resources v. Trump / V.O.S. v. Trump Nos. 24-1287 & 25-250, calling it a major victory for the U.S. Constitution’s Separation of Powers and the rule of law.
Need constitutional or Supreme Court strategy? Biazzo Law handles separation-of-powers issues, federal appeals, and amicus briefing. Call/Text (703) 297-5777.
In its ruling, the Supreme Court held that the President lacked authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose sweeping tariffs without clear congressional authorization. The Court reaffirmed that the power to tax — including the power to impose tariffs — belongs to Congress under Article I of the Constitution.
Corey J. Biazzo, Esq., a U.S. Supreme Court appeals lawyer who filed an amicus curiae brief in the case, emphasized the constitutional importance of the decision.
“The Constitution clearly vests the power to lay and collect taxes, duties, and imposts in Congress — not the President,” said Biazzo. “This ruling reinforces that major economic policy decisions must come from the Legislative Branch, not unilateral executive action.”
The case arose from executive orders that relied on IEEPA to impose nationwide tariffs. The Supreme Court rejected the argument that IEEPA’s authorization to “regulate importation” included the power to impose revenue-raising tariffs.
In doing so, the Court applied the Major Questions Doctrine, requiring clear congressional authorization before permitting the transfer of vast economic authority to the Executive Branch.
Biazzo Law’s amicus brief argued that:
· The President has no inherent constitutional authority to impose tariffs.
· IEEPA is a sanctions statute, not a revenue statute.
· Tariffs are taxes, and the taxing power is exclusively legislative.
· Allowing unilateral executive tariff regimes would erode the Constitution’s structural safeguards.
“The Separation of Powers is not a technical formality,” Biazzo added. “It is the structural foundation that protects liberty. When one branch attempts to assume the powers of another, the courts must enforce constitutional boundaries. The Supreme Court did exactly that.”
The decision reinforces that Congress must clearly authorize significant economic actions and that executive authority remains subject to constitutional limits.
Biazzo Law focuses on constitutional litigation, federal appellate advocacy, and U.S. Supreme Court matters. The firm regularly handles complex constitutional and administrative law disputes involving structural separation-of-powers principles.
For more information about Biazzo Law’s Supreme Court and federal appellate practice, visit:
Link to Biazzo Law Amicus Curiae Brief:
Link to U.S. Supreme Court’s Opinion:
Our Government Oversight Efforts
At Biazzo Law, we are actively monitoring cases like this and other matters that raise concerns about potential or actual violations of the United States Constitution.
Through our government oversight initiative, we:
Conduct independent legal analysis of government actions
Submit Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests to uncover relevant records
Publicly publish our findings to promote transparency and accountability
File amicus curiae briefs before the United States Supreme Court in cases of national importance
Provide public educational materials, including analyses like this blog, to inform individuals and businesses
Learn more about our work on our Government Oversight page:👉 https://www.biazzolaw.com/government-oversight
Comments