Supreme Court strikes down Trump tariffs, rebuking president's signature economic policy
Source: CNBC
Published Fri, Feb 20 2026 10:03 AM EST Updated 12 Min Ago
The Supreme Court on Friday struck down a huge chunk of President Donald Trump’s far-reaching tariff agenda, in a major rebuke of the president’s key economic policy. The law that undergirds those import duties “does not authorize the President to impose tariffs,” the majority ruled six to three in a decision Trump had been awaiting.
The ruling is a massive loss for Trump, who has made tariffs — and his asserted power to impose them on any country at any time, without congressional input — a central feature of his administration’s economic and foreign policies. Chief Justice John Roberts delivered the opinion of the court. Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Brett Kavanaugh dissented. The ruling was silent on whether tariffs that have been paid under the higher rates will need to be refunded.
Since retaking the White House, Trump has rapidly reshaped America’s longstanding trade relationships by imposing a staggering array of import duties that have touched nearly every country on earth. Many of those tariffs were invoked using a novel reading of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA. They include Trump’s near-global “reciprocal” tariffs, and separate duties related to the alleged trafficking of deadly drugs into the U.S.
IEEPA does not explicitly mention tariffs, and the court ruling Friday said it the law does not grant the president authority to impose tariffs. Instead, it allows the president to “regulate … importation” of foreign property transactions after declaring a national emergency in order to deal with certain “unusual and extraordinary” threats. The Trump administration has argued that language empowers the president to impose tariffs on foreign goods.
Read more: https://www.cnbc.com/2026/02/20/supreme-court-trump-tariffs-ruling.html
Link to RULING (PDF) - https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/24-1287_4gcj.pdf
Someone in the chat at SCOTUSBlog indicated -
Article updated.
Previous articles/headline -
Published Fri, Feb 20 2026 10:03 AM EST Updated 12 Min Ago
The Supreme Court on Friday struck down a huge chunk of President Donald Trump's far-reaching tariff agenda. The law that undergirds those import duties "does not authorize the President to impose tariffs," the majority ruled six to three. Chief Justice John Roberts delivered the opinion of the court. Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Brett Kavanaugh dissented.
Since retaking the White House, Trump has rapidly reshaped America's longstanding trade relationships by imposing a staggering array of import duties that have touched nearly every country on earth. Many of those tariffs were invoked using a novel reading of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA. They include Trump's near-global "reciprocal" tariffs, and separate duties related to the alleged trafficking of deadly drugs into the U.S.
IEEPA does not explicitly mention tariffs. Instead, it allows the president to "regulate ... importation" of foreign property transactions after declaring a national emergency in order to deal with certain "unusual and extraordinary" threats. The Trump administration has argued that that language empowers the president to impose tariffs on foreign goods.
Critics charged that the law does not permit the president to unilaterally impose levies of any size on any country at any time. A federal trade court and a federal appeals court both found Trump's IEEPA tariffs illegal before the Supreme Court took up the case. The majority of U.S. tariff revenue generated last year came from the IEEPA duties.
The Supreme Court on Friday struck down a huge chunk of President Donald Trump's far-reaching tariff agenda.
The law that undergirds those import duties "does not authorize the President to impose tariffs," the majority ruled.
This is breaking news. Please check back for updates.
Original article -
This is breaking news. Please check back for updates.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Other than enriching himself.
Looks like he's going off the deep end. 
to commiserate with and ask for advice.
The justices expressed skepticism in November that the administration could impose sweeping tariffs under a federal law granting emergency powers.
Supreme Court rules Trump doesn’t have the tariff authority he claimed
— Anti-Trumpism (@forabettertomorrow.bsky.social) 2026-02-20T15:17:44.990Z
www.ms.now/deadline-whi...
https://www.ms.now/deadline-white-house/deadline-legal-blog/supreme-court-tariffs-trump-ruling
The ruling addressed a key Donald Trump policy as the high court considers the scope of presidential power across several cases this term. The court’s Republican-appointed majority has broadly empowered the Republican president but has occasionally checked him.
The justices agreed in September to consider the tariff issue on an expedited basis, granting review in two separate cases, both of which the administration lost in the lower courts. One of them came through a specialized trade and appeals court, and the other came through a general federal court in Washington.
When the high court heard oral arguments in November, the justices sounded skeptical of the administration’s position that Trump was authorized to impose the sweeping tariffs under a federal law called the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA).......
In the case called Trump v. V.O.S. Selections, the Federal Circuit ruled that Trump overstepped his authority in attempting to rely on IEEPA. “The statute neither mentions tariffs (or any of its synonyms) nor has procedural safeguards that contain clear limits on the President’s power to impose tariffs,” the circuit court wrote in a divided ruling that split the court 7-4, though not strictly along the party lines of the presidents who appointed the judges.
In the other case, Learning Resources v. Trump, U.S. District Judge Rudolph Contreras, an Obama appointee, wrote that if Congress “had intended to delegate to the President the power of taxing ordinary commerce from any country at any rate for virtually any reason, it would have had to say so.” He wrote that no other president “has ever purported to impose tariffs under IEEPA.”
I listened to the oral arguments and did not think that this would be that close of a decision but this is a very divided opinion which is why it took so long to come down.
Link to tweet
But ... good on you SCOTUS!
Edit to ADD:
When do I get my REFUND for the artificially high prices I've paid for these stupid f**king tariffs in the last year?
Prices need to come down immediately because tariffs are deleted. Chump owes me a lot of money!
I know that won’t happen but I can wish 
... and most of their rulings are based on precedent. Other than a few way-out wacky ones, they will continue to do that, despite a president's nutty or fascist intentions.
Most of the time, the Supreme Court's decisions mean that the way we've been doing things will continue to be the way we do things. I'm no legal expert, but I've been here almost 75 years, and I've seen a lot of stuff.
Consumers paid prices that were too high, because retailers were being overcharged. Manufacturers and distributers (including importers) were charging higher prices in anticipation of having to pay the foreign manufacturers. The foreign manufacturers from China and elsewhere were getting their arms twisted by the US government. They had to pay a tariff just to ship their products into the US, and then they had to raise their prices to the buyers to cover that cost.
So now, how does Uncle Sam compensate all these people who were overcharged?
I just bought a package of Colombian coffee for $10 and it should have cost maybe $7 because that's what I paid before Chump started this bullshit. The coffee isn't worth $3 more now, but that $3 represents the tariffs that Colombia (and other exporters) had to pay. Do I get a $3 refund on every package of coffee that I've purchased in the last year? How can the government compensate every consumer that has purchased coffee in the past 12 months? And that's just one product. The tariffs are on just about everything we're buying right now.
Whether or not it will ever happen, well ....
They charged it backward to the distributors and consumers but they didn't pay it forward to the foreign companies who shipped their products into the USA? I believe you're wrong about that.
But in any case, the American consumers - the end buyers - are the ones paying the tariffs whenever we buy stuff. I was making the point that the US government can never compensate us for these losses.
I know we'll never see any refunds from the overcharges we've already paid in the last year. That money is already gone. And retailers were caught in the middle, they held off raising prices as long as they could.
US manufacturers and importers were and are raising their prices WHETHER OR NOT their goods were charged a tariff. They raised prices across the board because they COULD. It has been a money grab from the get-go.
I hope someone does a full expose on this sham very soon. Americans need to know that we're being overcharged for EVERYTHING we buy, including products that were never subject to Chump's tariff charges.
Chump did that!
Then he will create a Board of Peace Court & only that court can judge his tariffs.
I'll get my way. So there! 
Right. Let's all pretend Piggy is legit.
Us mere mortals aren't mentally equipped to deal with that level of complexity.
But rest peacefully in the thought that Trump's drive to dictatorship and dictating what goes because his Bigly Genius Brain came up with an idea on how to destroy global trade, has been severely dented.
Pushback feels good.
It's late and only a first step, but it feels good.
And from the SC too!