John G. Roberts Jr.

Rule Changes

Authored majority opinion striking down IEEPA tariffs

For thirteen months, the Trump administration has been imposing tariffs on U.S. trading partners using emergency economic powers no president had ever claimed for that purpose. On February 20, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that those tariffs were illegal. Three weeks later, the administration launched Section 301 trade investigations into 16 economies—covering China, the European Union, Japan, India, Mexico, and eleven others—over allegations that their industrial policies create excess manufacturing capacity that undercuts American producers. The investigations span more than twenty sectors, from steel and semiconductors to batteries and robotics.

Updated Mar 12

Rule Changes

Representing IAM National Pension Fund trustees

When employers exit multiemployer pension plans, they owe a share of unfunded benefits—a calculation that hinges on assumptions about future investment returns. The IAM National Pension Fund changed its interest rate assumption from 7.5% to 6.5% in January 2018, weeks after the measurement date, and applied it retroactively to employers who had already withdrawn. The result: withdrawal liabilities tripled from $935 million to over $3 billion.

Updated Jan 21

Rule Changes

Presiding over Chevron v. Plaquemines Parish

A Louisiana jury ordered Chevron to pay $745 million in April 2025 for wrecking coastal wetlands through decades of oil drilling. Now the Supreme Court will decide if that verdict stands—or if Chevron can escape to federal court by claiming it was acting under federal orders when it refined aviation fuel during World War II. The catch: the lawsuit concerns oil production, not refining, and much of the damage happened decades after the war ended.

Updated Jan 14

Rule Changes

Authored 5-4 majority opinion upholding travel ban in Trump v. Hawaii

Trump signed his first travel ban seven days into his presidency, blocking entry from seven Muslim-majority countries and igniting protests at airports nationwide. Courts blocked it within a week. Eight years later, after Supreme Court victories, a Biden reversal, and a return to power, Trump's December 2025 expansion restricts entry from 39 countries—affecting one in eight people worldwide and eliminating exemptions that previously protected immediate family members of U.S. citizens.

Updated Dec 28, 2025

Rule Changes

Previously granted an administrative stay; court later vacated it

Immigration judges say the Justice Department has effectively muzzled them: speak publicly about immigration and you need permission, and what you say can be steered into “agency talking points.” The Trump administration’s response has been procedural: you don’t get federal court—go through the civil-service machinery first.

Updated Dec 19, 2025

Rule Changes

Presiding over and often shaping the Court’s incremental expansion of presidential removal power

In 2025, President Donald Trump launched an aggressive campaign to assert sweeping authority over independent federal agencies, testing the long‑standing 1935 Supreme Court precedent in Humphrey’s Executor v. United States that limited presidential power to fire members of multi‑member regulatory commissions. After the Supreme Court used its emergency docket to let Trump remove Democratic members of the National Labor Relations Board, the Merit Systems Protection Board, and the Consumer Product Safety Commission, the conflict escalated when Trump fired Democratic Federal Trade Commission commissioner Rebecca Kelly Slaughter in March 2025 and later attempted to oust Federal Reserve governor Lisa Cook, both before their fixed terms expired.

Updated Dec 11, 2025