Tánaiste and Minister for Finance Simon Harris said the Government was “closely monitoring the situation” after the US supreme court ruled on Friday that Donald Trump’s sweeping tariffs were illegal. The ruling is a landmark rebuke to the economic centrepiece of the US president’s second term.
Trump responded by announcing that, effective immediately, he would sign an executive order to impose a 10 per cent global tariff using section 122, which was created by the 1974 Trade Act.
Harris said despite the court decision, the imposition of tariffs by the Trump administration “by some other means, for instance via some alternative legal basis, cannot be ruled out”.
He said Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade Helen McEntee would be “engaging with her European colleagues in the coming days”.
READ MORE
“Low tariffs are in everyone’s interests and, at a European level, we will continue to engage with our US counterparts in order to promote measures that work for all.”
[ Cliff Taylor: What does the court decision on Trump tariffs mean in practice?Opens in new window ]
The court ruling does not strike down separate tariffs Trump imposed on specific sectors – the automobile, steel, aluminium and timber industries – on national security grounds, following what are known as section 232 investigations.
The Trump administration had instigated section 232 investigations into the pharmaceutical and semiconductor sectors, but did not follow through with tariffs and the outcome of those investigations was never published.
There is significant concern within the pharma industry in Ireland that the court decision may turn Trump’s attention to possibly introducing tariffs on pharma imports, via the national security route.
The pharma sector accounts for a substantial portion of the Republic’s exports across the Atlantic, meaning Ireland would be particularly exposed should Trump pivot to target the sector.
Despite repeated threats to do so during the first year of his second term, Trump has not levied any tariffs on pharmaceuticals products. The EU-US deal agreed that any future tariffs on such imports would be capped at 15 per cent.
It would also be open to the White House to launch a flurry of section 232 investigations into a range of other sectors, as a precursor to fresh tariffs. However, such national security inquiries usually take several months to complete.
It is unclear where the court ruling leaves a deal the European Union struck with the Trump administration on tariffs last summer. That saw EU states accept 15 per cent tariffs across the board on future trade with the US, in order to head off a possible trade war.
Senior officials inside the European Commission, the EU’s executive branch, which negotiated that tariff deal, expected Trump to use other means to reimpose his tariff agenda, even partially.
A commission spokesman said EU officials were analysing the US supreme court ruling “carefully” and would make contact with the US administration “as we seek clarity on the steps they intend to take in response to this ruling”.
The chief executive of the Irish Exporters Association, Simon McKeever, noted that while the ruling looks like good news initially for many sectors, it does not extend to pharmaceuticals, steel, aluminium or their derivatives.
“The immediate outlook remains uncertain,” he said. “The process of unwinding duties already paid is likely to be complex and disruptive as US importers seek refunds, and the US president has already signalled that imposing tariffs under different legislation remains an option."
Fergal O’Brien, executive director with business group Ibec, said “while [the ruling] is a very significant decision which will inevitably weaken the hand of the US government in relation to the application of across-the-board tariffs, there are a number of other trade and tariff instruments which the Trump administration could use which would impact on EU-US trade.
“The EU-US tariff framework agreed in July 2025 has provided some certainty for businesses and limited the risks on future tariff increases, but it has also resulted in some sectors of the economy continuing to face particularly high tariff rates.
“Ibec members will now watch with interest as to how the US government will respond to the court’s decision and consider the wider implications of both today’s decision and any possible US policy reaction in the round.”
