AMNA NAWAZ: For more on what today's ruling means# for the economy, we're joined by Natasha Sarin,## professor of law and finance at Yale University# and president of the Budget Lab at Yale.

Good to see you, Natasha.

So we got this Supreme Court ruling# at 10:00 E.. the president had announced a new# slate of tariffs.

Help us understand,## which of the tariffs are now# gone and which are in place?

NATASHA SARIN, President, Budget Lab# at Yale University: So I will say it## is a bit of a whirlwind.

And the nature# of what happened this morning was you## basically had the president having# effectuated across-the-board tariffs## on allies and adversaries like at levels# that we haven't seen in the last century.

The Supreme Court said that about# two-thirds of those tariffs,## the tariffs that had been issued under# this particular authority called IEEPA,## were invalidated as a result of their decision.# And then, as was widely expected, as a result## of a decision like this, the president said he# plans to use other authorities like Section 232## or Section 122 of the Trade Act, in order to# be able to essentially keep in place tariffs## that were at levels that were dismissed# by the Supreme Court earlier this morning.

That's actually a harder thing to do# in practice than you might think having## listened to the president this afternoon# because there are more rules and process## requirements associated with the other# authorities that he's trying to deploy,## which is why his preferred authority was one# that the Supreme Court said simply couldn't## whether the burden of tariffs as broad-based as# those that this administration has pushed for.

AMNA NAWAZ: And you just heard# a little bit about this in the## previous conversation.

What about# those billions in tariff revenue?## Could retailers and manufacturers see some# kind of a refund?

Could consumers as well?

NATASHA SARIN: What's so interesting is that in# oral argument, Justice Amy Coney Barrett said,## won't it be a mess with respect to trying to# think about what to do with the fact that about## $140 billion of revenue have already come into the## fisc as a result of these tariffs that# were at play in the Supreme Court case?

Just as Amy Coney Barrett ultimately ruled to# invalidate those tariffs, along with the majority,## but Justice Kavanaugh said explicitly,# this is in fact going to be a mess,## recalling her in oral argument.# And the decision says literally## nothing with respect to what is going# to happen with respect to those refunds.

One reason why that really matters to consumers# is a large chunk of those $140 billion that have## already been paid into the fisc as a result# of these tariff levels have actually been## passed through in the form of higher prices.

We# estimate my colleagues and I at Budget Lab that## that cost the average American household# around $2,000 a year in higher prices.

But if there are any refunds, they're going# to go to the firms, the importers of goods.## And so how that ultimately plays out with# respect to the consumers seeing these dollars,## that's an open question.

How these# refunds would even work in practice,## big open question that this# decision says nothing about.

AMNA NAWAZ: Natasha, what about this# new 10 percent global tariff that the## president also announced?

Given# how the Supreme Court just ruled,## does he have the authority to do# that or does he need Congress?

NATASHA SARIN: Part of what I'm worried# about with respect to these alternate## trade authorities is you're almost in# this tariff legal uncertainty doom loop,## where he's effectuating these 10 percent# across-the-board tariffs that were in## place this morning before this decision# landed through this alternative authority.

I'll note that this alternative authority only# gives him the capacity to keep those tariffs in## place for 150 days.

What happens after those 150# days, who's to say?

But even for those 150 days,## does he have the power under this authority# to levy tariffs like this?

It's never been## tried before and it's ultimately# something that is likely to reach## the Supreme Court in some capacity over# the course of the months and years ahead.

And so I think tariff uncertainty# is here with us to stay for quite## some time.

And I suspect this is# not the last time that the highest## court in the land is going to be# weighing in on these questions.

AMNA NAWAZ: You look at the economic# impact of all of these things.

In a minute or so we have left, with the# existing tariffs that are still in place,## with this new 10 percent global tariff, what's# the economic impact you're looking at there?

NATASHA SARIN: So what we know is that# tariffs are at their highest level that## we've seen over the course of the last century.# As a result of today's Supreme Court decision,## tariff rates fell from something like an effective# tariff rate of 16 percent to around 9 percent.

But they rose way back up as a result of# these 10 percent across-the-board tariffs## that the president announced this afternoon# that basically held in place a large chunk## of his existing tariff agenda.

And all that# is to say these are the most inflationary## policies in our lifetimes.

Tariffs# are a tax on the American consumer,## to the tune of several thousand# dollars of increased prices every year.

And at a moment when the American people are# still grappling with post-pandemic inflation,## higher prices for literally everything that they# consume than they remember just a few years ago,## it is striking that we are pursuing# these types of inflationary policies,## and really to no economic end that has been# clearly articulated from this administration.

AMNA NAWAZ: Natasha Sarin, president of the Yale# Budget Lab, thank you so much for your time.

NATASHA SARIN: Thanks so much for having me.