Kind of. My reading of the opinion is that it boils down to “the power to regulate doesn’t imply the power to tax and never has.”
The President asserts the extraordinary power to unilat-
erally impose tariffs of unlimited amount, duration, and
scope. In light of the breadth, history, and constitutional
context of that asserted authority, he must identify clear
congressional authorization to exercise it.
IEEPA’s grant of authority to “regulate . . . importation”
falls short. IEEPA contains no reference to tariffs or duties.
The Government points to no statute in which Congress
used the word “regulate” to authorize taxation. And until
now no President has read IEEPA to confer such power.
We claim no special competence in matters of economics
or foreign affairs. We claim only, as we must, the limited
role assigned to us by Article III of the Constitution. Ful-
filling that role, we hold that IEEPA does not authorize the
President to impose tariffs.
Did they cite the case of No Shit v. Sherlock?
Kind of. My reading of the opinion is that it boils down to “the power to regulate doesn’t imply the power to tax and never has.”
Full opinion: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/24-1287_4gcj.pdf