Key Insights on Trump's Tariffs Following Supreme Court Ruling

Feb 22, 2026, 2:21 AM

Hover over text to view sources

The Supreme Court recently ruled that President Trump's use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose tariffs was unconstitutional, asserting that such powers belong to Congress rather than the executive branch. This decision has significant implications for the future of US trade policy and the economy.

One of the most pressing outcomes of the ruling is the financial impact on the federal government. The government has been collecting approximately $30 billion in tariffs each month, a figure that had risen significantly since Trump took office. However, tariffs only account for a little over 5% of total government revenue, meaning that while the ruling could exacerbate the federal deficit, it won't cripple the Treasury.

The Supreme Court's decision specifically affects tariffs imposed under IEEPA, which constitute about half of the total tariffs collected since Trump's presidency. Other tariffs, applied through different legislative frameworks, remain unchanged. This ruling highlights a clear constitutional boundary regarding the imposition of taxes, emphasizing that such authority resides with Congress.

Moreover, the burden of these tariffs has predominantly fallen on US businesses, not foreign suppliers as Trump had claimed. Research indicates that nearly all the costs associated with the tariffs are absorbed by American importers, leading to higher prices for consumers. Many businesses have attempted to mitigate these costs by shifting production to countries with lower tariffs, exemplifying the complex economic landscape shaped by the current trade policies.

In response to the ruling, Trump announced a new 10% tariff on all imports, utilizing different legal justifications to continue his aggressive trade stance. This tariff, however, is limited in duration and must be approved by Congress after a specified period. The administration's reliance on alternate statutes for tariff imposition may limit its ability to enact broad measures without legislative support.

Political repercussions also loom large. The administration's economic approval ratings are reportedly low, prompting a cautious approach to new tariffs to avoid further alienating voters amid rising living costs. Notably, the administration has already rolled back tariffs on certain goods, such as coffee and upholstered furniture, in response to public discontent.

Despite promises that such tariffs would revive domestic manufacturing, evidence suggests that the opposite is true. The manufacturing sector has faced significant job losses, and overall morale within factories remains low, with many citing increased costs due to tariffs as a key issue.

The Supreme Court's ruling raises questions about the future of tariff policy and executive power. While the administration may seek to impose new tariffs, the constraints of existing laws could limit its ability to do so effectively. The decision underscores the importance of legislative checks on executive authority, particularly in matters of significant economic impact.

In summary, the Supreme Court's ruling against Trump's tariffs has far-reaching implications for trade policy, government revenue, and the burden on US businesses. As the administration navigates this new landscape, the balance of power between the executive and legislative branches will be crucial in shaping the future of tariffs in the United States.

Fed Officials Signal Rate Cuts If Inflation Declines

Minutes from the Federal Reserve's January meeting reveal that officials are open to further interest rate cuts if inflation decreases. However, some members caution against premature cuts, emphasizing the need for clear signs of inflation stabilizing at the Fed's 2% target.

SEC Chair Advocates for US as 'Crypto Capital' Amid Controversy

SEC Chair Paul Atkins has expressed a vision for the US to become the 'crypto capital of the world' during a recent House hearing. This statement has drawn criticism from Democrats who accuse him of undermining trust in the SEC amid ongoing investigations into cryptocurrency firms linked to President Trump.

Ross Gerber Critiques Trump and Melania Memecoins for Spooking Investors

Ross Gerber, CEO of Gerber Kawasaki, has criticized the hype surrounding Trump and Melania-themed meme coins, attributing their decline to investor distrust and market volatility. He warns that such speculative tokens lead to significant losses for everyday investors, who are often left 'holding the bag' as celebrity promoters profit.

Warsh's Fed-Treasury Accord Proposal Sparks Market Debate

Kevin Warsh's call for a new Federal Reserve-Treasury accord has reignited discussions about the implications for market independence and fiscal policy. The proposed framework aims to clarify the Fed's balance sheet alongside Treasury debt issuance, raising concerns about potential risks in the $30 trillion bond market.

Economic Experts Weigh In on Trump's Nomination of Kevin Warsh for Fed Chair

Kevin Warsh's nomination by President Trump to lead the Federal Reserve has sparked mixed reactions among economic experts. While some praise his experience and potential for market reassurance, others express concern over his past policy shifts and political ties.