After months of hearing arguments, the Supreme Court has yet to decide on Trump’s tariffs

WASHINGTON (AP) — When the Supreme Court granted an unusually quick hearing on President Donald Trump’s tariffs, a similarly quick resolution seemed possible.

After all, Trump’s lawyers told the court, speed was of fundamental importance on an issue central to the Republican president’s economic agenda. They pointed to a statement from Treasury Secretary Scott Besent warning that “the longer the final ruling is delayed, the greater the risk of economic disruption.”

He watches: Trump says he is “eagerly awaiting” the Supreme Court’s ruling in the tariff case

But nearly three months have passed since arguments in the closely watched case, and the court is not scheduled to meet in public for more than three weeks.

No one knows for sure what is happening among the nine justices, many of whom expressed doubts about the legality of the tariffs during arguments in November. But the timeline for deciding the case now appears fairly typical, and could reflect the natural decline that occurs not just in major cases but in almost all disputes heard by judges.

Many Supreme Court practitioners and law professors have scoffed at the idea that the justices are stalling on imposing the tariffs, delaying a potentially uncomfortable ruling against Trump.

“People suspect this kind of thing from time to time, but I’m not aware of cases where we have more than just speculation,” said Jonathan Adler, a law professor at the College of William and Mary in Williamsburg, Virginia.

The time frame alone also does not indicate one outcome or another.

One possible explanation “is that the court is more evenly divided than appears to be the case in oral arguments and that the fifth vote is wobbly,” said Carter Phillips, an attorney who has made 91 arguments before the Supreme Court.

Even if a majority opinion is drafted and agreed upon by five or more members of the court, a separate opinion, perhaps in dissent, could slow things down, Phillips said.

Just last week, the court issued two opinions in cases discussed in October. All nine judges agreed with the result, a situation that usually allows decisions to be issued relatively quickly. But a separate opinion in each case may have delayed the decision.

The court generally moves more slowly on cases at hand, perhaps because of the flood of emergency appeals the Trump administration has brought to the justices. The first case discussed was not decided until January of this year. Usually, this happens in December, if not November.

Over the past 20 years, the average time to get a Supreme Court opinion has been just over three months, according to data compiled by Adam Feldman, founder of Empirical SCOTUS. The timeline has increased in recent years, with the court releasing half or more of its cases in June.

Decision times can vary greatly. The court can move quickly, especially in cases that require tough external deadlines: the landmark case Bush v. Gore, which effectively decided the results of the 2000 presidential election, took just over a day. The latest case regarding TikTok took seven days.

Read more: Supreme Court upholds TikTok ban if it’s not sold by the Chinese, and Trump promises a solution

On the upside, when judges stick to their own timelines, cases can take much longer to resolve. Gundy v. United States, a 2018 case argued over how to manage the sex offender registry, took more than eight months to decide.

Key decisions on expanding gun rights, overturning Roe v. Wade and ending affirmative action in college admissions were issued after six to eight months of debate on the issues.

Also yet to be decided is a second major case the court has been accelerating over redistricting in Louisiana and the future of a key provision in the Voting Rights Act.

The issue of tariffs has gained increasing importance because the consequences of the Trump administration’s policy have been playing out in real time, in ways both positive and negative.

“Like many, I was hoping the Supreme Council would speed up the decision,” said Mark Bush, an expert on international trade policy and law at Georgetown University. “But this is not a surprise in the sense that they have until June and there are a lot of issues to resolve.”

The issues of separation of central powers in the case are complex. Whatever the majority decides, there will likely be dissent, and both sides will carefully calibrate their writing.

“It’s ultimately the language that’s going to make this kind of meaningful,” he said.

Meanwhile, as the justices consider the case, Trump continues to invoke the threat of tariffs, extolling their virtues and referring to the case as the most important case on the court.

“I hope, like many people, that the justices are watching the tariff threats against Greenland and recognizing the gravity of this moment,” Bush said.