Democrats’ brief celebration over a Supreme Court ruling against President Trump’s tariffs crumbled as Trump swiftly imposed new duties under alternative laws, keeping America’s protectionist agenda intact and exposing leftist hopes as futile.
Story Snapshot
- Supreme Court ruled 6-3 on February 20, 2026, that Trump exceeded authority under IEEPA for broad anti-fentanyl and reciprocal tariffs.
- Trump responded hours later with a 10% global tariff under Section 122 of the Trade Act, effective February 24, preserving policy continuity.
- Existing Section 232 national security and Section 301 unfair practices tariffs remain fully in place.
- Treasury projects virtually unchanged revenue for 2026, thwarting Democratic narratives of a Trump defeat.
Supreme Court Strikes Down IEEPA Tariffs
The Supreme Court issued a 6-3 decision in Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump on February 20, 2026. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the majority opinion, invoking the major questions doctrine. The court held that IEEPA does not authorize unbounded presidential tariffs on imports from China, Canada, Mexico, and others. These tariffs targeted fentanyl trafficking and trade deficits framed as national emergencies. Lower courts had blocked them earlier, with stays allowing collection during review. The ruling curtails executive overreach while upholding congressional control over trade powers.
Trump’s Immediate Policy Pivot
President Trump signed an executive order that afternoon imposing a 10% nondiscriminatory global tariff under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974. This measure activates February 24 at 12:01 a.m., with exemptions for USMCA-compliant goods, energy, and pharmaceuticals. Trump affirmed that all national security tariffs under Section 232 and those addressing unfair practices under Section 301 stay in full force. U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer announced new Section 301 investigations into trade partners like Japan, the EU, and Canada.
Admin Officials Confirm Continuity
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent stated that 2026 tariff revenue remains virtually unchanged despite the ruling. The pivot sustains approximately $200 billion in projected collections, protecting U.S. manufacturing and pressuring unfair traders. This approach mirrors Trump’s first-term successes with Section 232 steel and aluminum duties and Section 301 actions against China, which yielded the USMCA deal. Democrats’ push to curb Trump’s America First trade agenda failed as statutory tools proved robust.
Trading partners face ongoing pressure to negotiate better terms amid the fentanyl crisis and deficits. The administration’s agility underscores limited government’s strength when presidents use Congress-delegated powers wisely, aligning with conservative principles of constitutional fidelity and economic sovereignty.
Dems' Rejoicing Over the Supreme Court Ruling on Trump's Tariffs Got Wrecked…by CNN? https://t.co/Cpd3Ww9sis
— Fearless45 (@Fearless45Trump) February 21, 2026
Implications for America First Agenda
Short-term effects include importers absorbing the new 10% hit while USMCA allies gain shields. Long-term, Section 122 limits—capped at 15%, nondiscriminatory, and temporary for 150 days—reduce flexibility but minimize judicial risks. Potential refunds for invalidated IEEPA tariffs loom, with Justice Kavanaugh’s dissent noting billions possibly owed to importers. U.S. manufacturers benefit from sustained protection, bolstering jobs against globalist offshoring.
Sources:
Supreme Court Strikes Down Trump Tariffs (SCOTUSblog)
A Breakdown of the Court’s Tariff Decision (SCOTUSblog)
SCOTUS Opinion: Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump (Supreme Court)
