The across-the-board global tariff imposed by President Donald Trump took effect on Tuesday at 10%, lower than the 15% rate the president said would be implemented. 
A <a href="https://content.govdelivery.com/bulletins/gd/USDHSCBP-40b3b7b">bulletin</a> issued Tuesday by Customs and Border Protection announced an “additional 10% ad valorem duty on imported articles of every country for a period of 150 days, unless specifically exempt.” The notice comes just days after Trump <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/trump-hikes-his-new-tariffs-to-15-after-complete-review-of-scotus-decision?author=Mary+Margaret+Olohan&amp;category=News&amp;elementPosition=2&amp;row=0&amp;rowType=Vertical+List&amp;title=Trump+Blasts+Past+Original+Tariff+Vow+After+Supreme+Court+Ruling">said</a> that he would raise the global tariff rate to 15% “effective immediately.” 
“Based on a thorough, detailed, and complete review of the ridiculous, poorly written, and extraordinarily anti-American decision on Tariffs issued yesterday, after MANY months of contemplation, by the United States Supreme Court, please let this statement serve to represent that I, as President of the United States of America, will be, effective immediately, raising the 10% Worldwide Tariff on Countries, many of which have been ‘ripping’ the U.S. off for decades, without retribution (until I came along!), to the fully allowed, and legally tested, 15% level,&#8221; Trump wrote on Truth Social. 
<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/show/friendly-fire?utm_campaign=dwplus&amp;utm_content=20260224_sotu_aa_desktop&amp;utm_medium=website&amp;utm_source=banner" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-sk="tooltip_parent">Watch the State of the Union with The Daily Wire! Live coverage from the nation&#8217;s capital begins at 7:45 ET.</a>
A White House official <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/trump-administration/trump-global-tariff-start-10-percent-despite-announcement-15-percent-rcna260369">told</a> NBC News that the rate would start at 10% while officials prepare a separate executive order to increase it to 15%. The Daily Wire has reached out to the White House for clarification on the tariff rates. 
The Customs and Border Protection bulletin cited an <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2026/02/imposing-a-temporary-import-surcharge-to-address-fundamental-international-payments-problems/">executive order</a> Trump signed Friday after the Supreme Court struck down his &#8220;Liberation Day” tariffs, which had been imposed under the International Economic Emergency Powers Act (IEEPA). 

“I find that a surcharge in the form of ad valorem duties on certain imports is required to deal with the United States’ large and serious balance-of-payments deficit,” Trump wrote. “Accordingly, I impose, for a period of 150 days, a temporary import surcharge of 10 percent ad valorem, as described below, on articles imported into the United States, effective February 24, 2026.”
Products exempt from the tariffs include certain critical minerals, metals used in currency, energy and energy products, certain agricultural products, pharmaceuticals, certain electronics, and some passenger vehicles. 
These tariffs were imposed under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, which authorizes the president to address “certain fundamental international payment problems through surcharges and other special import restrictions.”
The Supreme Court ruling has led to uncertainty surrounding Trump’s broader economic agenda. On Monday, the European Union <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/eu-pauses-trade-deal-after-trump-warns-countries-not-to-play-games?topStoryPosition=undefined&amp;author=Leif+Le+Mahieu&amp;category=News&amp;elementPosition=2&amp;row=1&amp;rowHeadline=Top+Stories&amp;rowType=Top+Stories&amp;title=EU+Pauses+Trade+Deal+After+Trump+Warns+Countries+Not+To+‘Play+Games’">moved</a> to pause adoption of a trade deal with the United States that had been negotiated under Trump’s IEEPA tariffs.

President Trump Holds Press Briefing On Supreme Court’s Decision To Strike Down His Global Tariffs

Trump’s Global Tariffs Kick In At Lower Rate Than Expected

Customs and Border Protection (CPB)

Donald Trump

Economy

Politics

Supreme Court

Tariffs

trade

President Donald Trump ripped into the Supreme Court again on Monday over its decision to strike down most of his “Liberation Day” tariffs, saying he would continue to use other tools to implement his economic agenda. 
“The supreme court (will be using lower case letters for a while based on a complete lack of respect!) of the United States accidentally and unwittingly gave me, as President of the United States, far more powers and strength than I had prior to their ridiculous, dumb, and very internationally divisive ruling,” Trump <a href="https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/116119857222583140">wrote</a> on Truth Social. 
The Supreme Court on Friday ruled 6-3 that Trump could not use the International Economic Emergency Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose broad-scale tariffs on countries across the globe. On Saturday, Trump <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/trump-hikes-his-new-tariffs-to-15-after-complete-review-of-scotus-decision?author=Mary+Margaret+Olohan&amp;category=News&amp;elementPosition=0&amp;row=0&amp;rowHeadline=Up+Next&amp;rowType=Up+Next+Carousel&amp;title=Trump+Hikes+His+New+Tariffs+To+15%25+After+%E2%80%98Complete+Review%E2%80%99+Of+SCOTUS+Decision">signed</a> a global 15% tariff on all countries under the Trade Act of 1974. 
Trump suggested Monday that he would impose licensing requirements on foreign goods entering the United States. 
“For one thing, I can use Licenses to do absolutely ‘terrible’ things to foreign countries, especially those countries that have been RIPPING US OFF for many decades, but incomprehensibly, according to the ruling, can’t charge them a License fee — BUT ALL LICENSES CHARGE FEES, why can’t the United States do so? You do a license to get a fee! The opinion doesn’t explain that, but I know the answer!” Trump said. 
The president added that the Supreme Court should be “ashamed” of the tariff ruling, except for the three justices who dissented. Justice Brett Kavanaugh <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/kavanaugh-trump-has-other-legal-paths-to-keep-tariffs-in-place-despite-scotus-ruling?author=Leif+Le+Mahieu&amp;category=News&amp;elementPosition=2&amp;row=0&amp;rowType=Vertical+List&amp;title=Kavanaugh+Lays+Out+How+Trump+Could+Recreate+Tariffs+Through+Other+Laws">authored</a> the dissenting opinion, which was joined by conservative Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito. 
“Our incompetent supreme court (sic) did a great job for the wrong people, and for that they should be ashamed of themselves (but not the Great Three!),” Trump said. 
The president also suggested that the Supreme Court might next strike down his executive actions to prevent the children of illegal immigrants or foreigners with temporary visas from receiving citizenship upon birth in the United States. Trump said that striking down his actions would benefit China. 
“This supreme court (sic) will find a way to come to the wrong conclusion, one that again will make China, and various other Nations, happy and rich,” Trump said. “Let our supreme court (sic) keep making decisions that are so bad and deleterious to the future of our Nation &#8211; I have a job to do.”

President Trump And The First Lady Host Governor’s Dinner In East Room Of White House

‘A Great Job For The Wrong People’: Trump Renews Attack On SCOTUS’s ‘Incompetent’ Tariff Ruling

Courts

Executive

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump announced on Saturday that he will hike his worldwide tariffs to 15% after a &#8220;complete review&#8221; of the Supreme Court decision blocking his tariffs on Friday.
&#8220;Based on a thorough, detailed, and complete review of the ridiculous, poorly written, and extraordinarily anti-American decision on Tariffs issued yesterday, after MANY months of contemplation, by the United States Supreme Court, please let this statement serve to represent that I, as President of the United States of America, will be, effective immediately, raising the 10% Worldwide Tariff on Countries, many of which have been &#8216;ripping&#8217; the U.S. off for decades, without retribution (until I came along!), to the fully allowed, and legally tested, 15% level,&#8221; said Trump in a Saturday morning Truth Social post.
The president added: &#8220;During the next short number of months, the Trump Administration will determine and issue the new and legally permissible Tariffs, which will continue our extraordinarily successful process of Making America Great Again &#8211; GREATER THAN EVER BEFORE!!!&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
NEW: President Trump is raising the 10% worldwide tariff to the &#8220;fully allowed, and legally tested, 15% level.&#8221; <a href="https://t.co/0JsJDqLsh2">pic.twitter.com/0JsJDqLsh2</a>
— Mary Margaret Olohan (@MaryMargOlohan) <a href="https://twitter.com/MaryMargOlohan/status/2025242938624589857?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 21, 2026</a></blockquote>
The White House clarified on Friday that Trump is levying the tariffs by invoking his authority under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, empowering him to address “certain fundamental international payment problems through surcharges and other special import restrictions.&#8221; The initial White House proclamation imposed a 10% ad valorem import duty on all articles imported into the U.S. for 150 days, taking effect February 24 at 12:01 a.m.
“By taking this action, the United States can stem the outflow of its dollars to foreign producers and incentivize the return of domestic production,” a White House fact sheet explains. “By increasing its domestic production, the United States can correct its balance-of-payments deficit, while also creating good-paying jobs, and lowering costs for consumers.”
<div id="attachment_1047745" style="width: 886px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/trump-hikes-his-new-tariffs-to-15-after-complete-review-of-scotus-decision/trumps-global-tariffs-struck-down-by-us-supreme-court" rel="attachment wp-att-1047745"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-1047745" class="wp-image-1047745 size-large" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/02/GettyImages-2262195055-876x576.jpg" alt="" width="876" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/02/GettyImages-2262195055-876x576.jpg 876w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/02/GettyImages-2262195055-300x197.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/02/GettyImages-2262195055-768x505.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/02/GettyImages-2262195055.jpg 1024w" sizes=" (max-width: 876px) 100vw, 876px" /></a>President Donald Trump imposed a 10% global tariff on foreign goods, moving quickly to preserve his trade agenda after the U.S. Supreme Court struck down many of the levies he imposed last year. Photographer: Kyle Grillot/Bloomberg via Getty Images</div>
Trump&#8217;s actions come after the Supreme Court struck down his reciprocal tariffs on dozens of countries in a 6-3 decision on Friday, saying that the president does not have the authority to impose those broad-scale tariffs.
Trump, in a White House press briefing on Friday and in subsequent social media posts, said repeatedly that he is “ashamed” of the Supreme Court justices who ruled against him for “not having the Courage to do what is right for our Country.”
On the other hand, the president has repeatedly praised the justices who ruled in his favor.
&#8220;My new hero is United States Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh and, of course, Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito,&#8221; he posted on Saturday morning. &#8220;There is no doubt in anyone’s mind that they want to, MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!&#8221;

President Donald Trump

Trump Blasts Past Original Tariff Vow After Supreme Court Ruling

U.S. President Donald Trump will travel to China from March 31 to April 2 for a highly anticipated meeting between the leaders of the world&#8217;s two biggest economies, a trip announced as the Supreme Court overturned Trump&#8217;s sweeping tariffs on imported goods.
A White House official confirmed the trip on Friday, just before the highest U.S. court dealt Trump a stinging defeat by striking down many of the tariffs he has used in a global trade war, including some against rival China.
Trump&#8217;s talks with Chinese President Xi Jinping on an extended visit to Beijing had been expected to revolve around extending a trade truce that kept both countries from further hiking tariffs.
But the Supreme Court&#8217;s reversal created new questions for tense U.S.-China relations that had recently stabilized after Trump trimmed tariffs on Chinese goods, in exchange for measures from Beijing, including cracking down on the illicit fentanyl trade and pausing export restrictions on critical minerals.
Twenty-percent tariffs on China&#8217;s U.S.-bound exports were imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA, which the court ruled Trump had overstepped. Those tariffs were tied to national emergencies related to fentanyl distribution and trade imbalances.
Other duties on Chinese goods, including those implemented under legislated trade authorities known as Section 301 and Section 232, remain in place.
It was not immediately clear how many of the tariffs Trump would restore, but he told a press conference that he would impose a new 10% global tariff for 150 days.
Trump&#8217;s last trip to China, in 2017, was the most recent by a U.S. president.
&#8220;That&#8217;s going to be a wild one,&#8221; Trump told foreign leaders visiting Washington on Thursday about the upcoming China visit. &#8220;We have to put on the biggest display you&#8217;ve ever had in the history of China.&#8221;
The Chinese embassy in Washington declined to comment on the dates of the trip, which were first reported by Reuters. Beijing has not confirmed the trip.
The Trump administration has said the global tariffs were necessary because of national emergencies related to trade imbalances that have weakened U.S. manufacturing.
Trump had already been &#8220;playing defense&#8221; in the trade war, given the effectiveness of Beijing&#8217;s threat to cut off rare earths, said Scott Kennedy, a China economics expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington. The tariff defeat likely &#8220;cements his weakness in their eyes,&#8221; he said.
Chinese officials &#8220;like the direction of travel of the bilateral relationship in which the U.S. is diminished and they want to keep things from re-escalating,&#8221; Kennedy said.
Trump&#8217;s visit will be the leaders&#8217; first in-person talks since an October meeting in South Korea, where they agreed on the trade truce.
While the October meeting largely sidestepped the sensitive issue of Taiwan, Xi raised U.S. arms sales to the island when the two leaders spoke this month.
China views democratically governed Taiwan as its own territory, a position Taipei rejects. The U.S., bound by law to provide Taiwan with the means to defend itself, has formal diplomatic ties with China, but it maintains unofficial ties with Taiwan and is the island&#8217;s most important arms supplier.
Washington announced its largest-ever arms sale approval with Taiwan in December, including $11.1 billion in weapons that could ostensibly be used to defend against a Chinese attack. Taiwan expects more such sales.
Xi also said during the February call that he would consider further increasing soybean purchases, according to Trump. Struggling U.S. farmers are a major political constituency for Trump, and China is the top soybean consumer. Analysts said on Friday that China may be less likely to follow through on another big purchase of U.S. soybeans after the Supreme Court ruling.
Although Trump has justified hawkish policy steps from Canada to Greenland and Venezuela as necessary to thwart China, he has eased policy toward Beijing in the past several months in areas from tariffs to advanced computer chips and drones.
The global trade war Trump initiated after he began his second term as president in January 2025 has alienated other trading partners, including allies.
Critics had argued that imposing steep tariffs on countries across the board actually insulated Beijing from the tariff barrage and reduced incentives to move supply chains out of China.
Friday&#8217;s ruling could indirectly increase pressure on Beijing if the effective tariff rates on other countries, particularly in Southeast Asia, fall more than those on China, said Martin Chorzempa, a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute of International Economics.
&#8220;Unlike with many other countries, there is a well-established, much more legally durable mechanism for most of the tariffs on China that make them less affected than those on other countries,&#8221; Chorzempa said.
(Reporting by Trevor Hunnicutt and Michael Martina; Additional reporting by Katharine Jackson; Editing by Andrei Khalip, Colleen Jenkins, Rod Nickel, Patricia Zengerle)

Donald Trump, Xi Jinping

Trump To Travel To China In March, With Tariffs In Focus

Communist China

Global Politics

World

Xi Jinping

Most Americans say the Supreme Court of the United States was right to block much of President Donald Trump’s sweeping emergency tariffs, a decision on an issue that has exposed sharp divisions among Republicans and prompted open celebration from Democrats.
A <a href="https://today.yougov.com/politics/articles/54148-most-americans-approve-of-the-supreme-court-striking-down-trumps-tariffs">YouGov</a> survey released Friday found that 60 percent of U.S. adults “strongly” or “somewhat” approve of the Court’s ruling, compared to 23 percent who disapprove and 17 percent who are unsure. Democrats backed the decision overwhelmingly at 88 percent, while 63 percent of independents also approved. Republicans were more divided: 43 percent disapproved, while 30 percent said they approve.
The ruling came Friday morning in a 6–3 decision against Trump’s use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose tariffs on nearly all U.S. trading partners. Trump became the first president to rely on the nearly 50-year-old statute for such broad import taxes. Writing for the majority, Chief Justice John Roberts concluded that IEEPA does not authorize the president’s tariff regime.
The Court declined to address whether previously collected tariffs must be refunded, leaving that question to lower courts. Justice Amy Coney Barrett, a Trump appointee who joined the majority, has previously warned that refunds could become “a mess,” a concern echoed in dissent by Justice Brett Kavanaugh, joined by Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas.
The <a href="https://static1.squarespace.com/static/55693d60e4b06d83cf793431/t/6998a0b0febd02741b8399d0/1771610288746/Supreme+Court+Tariff+Ruling+IEEPA+Revenue+and+Potential+Refunds.pdf">Penn Wharton Budget Model</a> estimates the ruling could put as much as $175 billion in tariff revenue at risk, noting that importers typically have 180 days after goods are liquidated to file refund claims with U.S. Customs and Border Protection.
Reactions among Republican leaders ranged from constitutional praise to outright condemnation of the Court.
Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) applauded the ruling, writing on <a href="https://x.com/SenRandPaul/status/2024875042912285053">X</a> that the Court “defended the Constitution” by rejecting the use of emergency powers to impose taxes. “Tariffs are taxes and the power to declare them belongs to the Congress,” Paul added, warning that the precedent would have empowered future administrations to govern “by decree.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
The Supreme Court makes plain what should have been obvious: “The power to impose tariffs is “very clearly a branch of the power to tax.” <a href="https://t.co/FBjYD29Dfn">pic.twitter.com/FBjYD29Dfn</a>
— Senator Rand Paul (@SenRandPaul) <a href="https://twitter.com/SenRandPaul/status/2024873705478758639?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 20, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Vice President JD Vance, by contrast, <a href="https://x.com/JDVance/status/2024928034667545067">blasted</a> the ruling as judicial overreach. “This is lawlessness from the Court, plain and simple,” Vance wrote, arguing the decision would make it harder for presidents to protect American industries and supply chains.
Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) struck a more cautious tone, emphasizing that tariffs remain a viable policy tool. Thune <a href="https://x.com/LeaderJohnThune/status/2024909322388423065">said</a> Senate Republicans would continue working with the administration and House lawmakers to strengthen rural America, adding that Trump “has a wide range of other tariff powers and he will use them to defend American workers.”
House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) similarly defended the president’s strategy, <a href="https://x.com/SpeakerJohnson/status/2024892242930884617">noting</a> that tariffs have “brought in billions of dollars and created immense leverage” for U.S. trade negotiations. “Congress and the Administration will determine the best path forward in the coming weeks,” Johnson said.
Former Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) sided firmly with the Court, <a href="https://x.com/SenMcConnell/status/2024909495734808714">calling</a> the use of IEEPA “illegal” and warning that tariffs raise costs for American consumers, a reality he said Kentuckians know “better than most.”
Democrats were far less divided. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) <a href="https://x.com/RepJeffries/status/2024869850980421739">called</a> the ruling “a big victory for the American people” and “another crushing defeat for the wannabe King.” Senator Tim Kaine (D-VA) <a href="https://x.com/timkaine/status/2024878481557844330">said</a> similarly of Trump’s plan, “tariffs were illegal, dumb, and harmful to families, farms, and small businesses. Americans don’t want tariffs, they want lower costs.”
Trump, speaking to reporters at the White House Friday afternoon, called the decision “disappointing” and criticized Barrett and Justice Neil Gorsuch, both of whom he appointed. “I don’t want to say whether I regret nominating them,” Trump said. “I think their decision was terrible.” He added that he was “proud” of Kavanaugh, saying the justice’s “stock has gone so up.”
Within hours of the ruling, Trump announced he had signed a new executive order imposing a 10 percent global tariff under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, which allows temporary tariffs of up to 15 percent for 150 days to address large trade deficits.
The White House’s official X account responded more bluntly, posting: “Keep Calm and Tariff On.”

President Trump Departs White House For Florida

Republicans Divided As Tariff Debate Splits Voter Base After SCOTUS Decision

Polls

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump signed a global 10% tariff on all countries Friday evening following the Supreme Court&#8217;s ruling blocking his tariffs earlier in the day.
The president announced Friday evening that it was his &#8220;great honor&#8221; to have signed &#8220;a Global 10% Tariff on all Countries, which will be effective almost immediately.&#8221; The move is intended to address the fundamental international payment problems, the White House said, and to continue the Trump administration&#8217;s work to rebalance trade relationships in order to benefit American workers.
Trump is invoking his authority under section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, empowering him to address &#8220;certain fundamental international payment problems through surcharges and other special import restrictions,&#8221; the White House clarified in a fact sheet. The proclamation imposes a 10% ad valorem import duty on all articles imported into the U.S. for 150 days, taking effect February 24 at 12:01 a.m.
&#8220;By taking this action, the United States can stem the outflow of its dollars to foreign producers and incentivize the return of domestic production,&#8221; the fact sheet states. &#8220;By increasing its domestic production, the United States can correct its balance-of-payments deficit, while also creating good paying jobs, and lowering costs for consumers.&#8221;
The move came after the Supreme Court basically struck down Trump&#8217;s reciprocal tariffs on dozens of countries in a 6-3 decision, saying that the president does not have the authority to impose those broad-scale tariffs. Trump, in a White House press briefing on Friday and in subsequent social media posts, said repeatedly that he is &#8220;ashamed&#8221; of the Supreme Court justices who ruled against him for &#8220;not having the Courage to do what is right for our Country.&#8221;
In a Truth Social post on Friday night, he praised Justices Clarence Thomas, Brett Kavanaugh, and Samuel Alito for their &#8220;Strength, Wisdom, and Love of our Country.&#8221;
<div id="attachment_1047675" style="width: 874px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/after-scotus-ruling-trump-fires-back-with-10-tariff-on-all-countries/president-trump-holds-press-briefing-on-supreme-courts-decision-to-strike-down-his-global-tariffs" rel="attachment wp-att-1047675"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-1047675" class="wp-image-1047675 size-large" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/02/GettyImages-2262729694-864x576.jpg" alt="" width="864" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/02/GettyImages-2262729694-864x576.jpg 864w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/02/GettyImages-2262729694-300x200.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/02/GettyImages-2262729694-768x512.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/02/GettyImages-2262729694.jpg 1024w" sizes=" (max-width: 864px) 100vw, 864px" /></a>President Donald Trump speaks during a press briefing at the White House on February 20, 2026 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Chen Mengtong/China News Service/VCG via Getty Images)</div>
&#8220;When you read the dissenting opinions, there is no way that anyone can argue against them,&#8221; Trump said. &#8220;Foreign Countries that have been ripping us off for years are ecstatic, and dancing in the streets — But they won’t be dancing for long! The Democrats on the Court are thrilled, but they will automatically vote &#8216;NO&#8217; against ANYTHING that makes America Strong and Healthy Again.&#8221;
&#8220;They, also, are a Disgrace to our Nation,&#8221; Trump added. &#8220;Others think they’re being &#8216;politically correct,&#8217; which has happened before, far too often, with certain Members of this Court when, in fact, they’re just FOOLS and &#8216;LAPDOGS&#8217; for the RINOS and Radical Left Democrats and, not that this should have anything to do with it, very unpatriotic, and disloyal to the Constitution. It is my opinion that the Court has been swayed by Foreign Interests, and a Political Movement that is far smaller than people would think — But obnoxious, ignorant, and loud!&#8221;
Trump said that the case was extremely important to him, symbolizing economic and national security more &#8220;than anything else.&#8221;
&#8220;The Good News,&#8221; the president said, &#8220;is that there are methods, practices, Statutes, and other Authorities, as recognized by the entire Court and Congress, that are even stronger than the IEEPA TARIFFS, available to me as President of the United States of America and, in actuality, I was very modest in my &#8216;ask&#8217; of other Countries and Businesses because I wanted to do nothing that could sway the decision that has been rendered by the Court.&#8221;
According to the White House, there are some goods that won&#8217;t be subject to the import duty, such as certain critical minerals, natural resources and fertilizers that can&#8217;t be grown or produced in the U.S., pharmaceuticals, electronics, passengers vehicles, certain aerospace products, and more.

Trump Slaps 10% Tariff On The World — ‘Effective Immediately’

The Supreme Court has struck down the Liberation Day tariffs. 
 
In a 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court basically struck down the 10% baseline tariff on all trading partners. It struck down what Trump called reciprocal tariffs on dozens of countries. They weren&#8217;t actually reciprocal tariffs because those countries were not actually charging us those tariffs. We were just charging them higher tariffs on the basis of trade deficits. Drug trafficking tariffs on Canada, Mexico, and China are gone. And the 145% effective rate on most Chinese goods is gone as well. 
The Supreme Court says that the president does not have the unilateral authority or ability to simply impose broad-scale tariffs. 
The reason I originally said these tariffs were unconstitutional is because Article I “powers of the purse,” belong to Congress. That includes the power to tariff. Article I of the Constitution specifically names the powers of the purse. It says that the Constitution includes the authority to tax, borrow money, regulate commerce, coin money, establish post offices, declare war, and raise armed forces. That is what is in the tax, spend, and commerce powers of Congress.
Now the questions are, what can be delegated? What can&#8217;t be delegated? And what has been delegated? 
So obviously, in certain specified contexts, Congress has delegated specific tariff authority to the president. But at any point, did Congress just say to the president, you can tariff anybody for any reason, interminably at any rate, that you want?
And the answer, says the Supreme Court, is no.
I agree with the decision, legally.
<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/bss-260220-sub?elementPosition=0&amp;row=0&amp;rowHeadline=Recent+Episodes&amp;rowType=Horizontal+Show+Episodes+Carousel"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" class="size-large wp-image-974957 aligncenter" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/511983dad25841c8b1ec058d75769bbe-1024x171.webp" alt="DailyWire+" width="1024" height="171" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/511983dad25841c8b1ec058d75769bbe-1024x171.webp 1024w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/511983dad25841c8b1ec058d75769bbe-300x50.webp 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/511983dad25841c8b1ec058d75769bbe-768x128.webp 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/511983dad25841c8b1ec058d75769bbe-1536x256.webp 1536w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/511983dad25841c8b1ec058d75769bbe-2048x341.webp 2048w" sizes=" (max-width: 1024px) 100vw, 1024px" /></a>
The question under consideration here was whether the president of the United States has the unilateral authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), which is the power cited by the president of the United States, to levy tariffs on the entire world at once. That is the question at issue. 
The IEEPA text at issue states: 
<blockquote>At the times and to the extent specified in section 1701 of this title, the President may, under such regulations as he may prescribe, by means of instructions, licenses, or otherwise investigate, regulate, or prohibit any transactions in foreign exchange, transfers of credit or payments between, by, through, or to any banking institution, to the extent that such transfers or payments involve any interest of any foreign country or a national thereof, the importing or exporting of currency or securities, by any person, or with respect to any property, subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.</blockquote>
What the majority found is that IEEPA does not include broad-scale, unilateral, gigantic tariff power where the president cannot simply wake up one morning, print out a gigantic poster board, and say there is now a 45% tariff on the Solomon Islands that was not delegated in the IEEPA. 
That decision is correct, although I find it somewhat ironic that Justice Roberts claimed that Obamacare was not a tax for purposes of finding it constitutional, but finds that tariffs are in fact a form of tax for purposes of finding them unconstitutional, as promoted by the president. 
There are two arguments made by the majority opinion. One, the IEEPA does not actually authorize tariff power to the president in the way that the president has done. 
This doesn&#8217;t mean the president doesn&#8217;t have alternative tariff power. There are other ways the president can impose tariffs if he wants to.
The second argument is that Congress never delegated this power to the president. If they had, it would be clear, and not some mystery. They would say, “All tariff power belongs to the president.”
They wouldn&#8217;t hide it in the text. That is what&#8217;s called the major questions doctrine. It&#8217;s part of the non-delegation doctrine. The non-delegation doctrine says that unless Congress has delegated a power that it holds to the executive branch, then the executive branch can&#8217;t exercise that power. And there are certain powers that Congress cannot actually just delegate to the executive branch, because those are core powers of Congress.
This is why you can&#8217;t just have Congress become a vestigial organ. It was never supposed to be this way.
If the president actually had the inherent power under his foreign policy powers to just impose tariffs, he wouldn&#8217;t need some sort of emergency declaration. The fact that they use the emergency declaration means this is not predominantly a foreign policy question.
I urge conservatives to think about this very strongly: If the president of the United States can simply declare a national emergency and then tariff the entire planet, what can&#8217;t the federal government do on the basis of an emergency? Many statutes authorize specific delegations of temporary authority under emergency circumstances. If that is broadened out to include things such as tariffing the whole planet, imagine Democrats saying, “Until all countries stop producing oil-powered vehicles, we are tariffing everyone at 70%.” They could do that based on the way the administration is currently interpreting the statute.
If it becomes clear that the Trump administration will let go of this issue, I think you will see the markets begin to climb. There are a lot of businesses in the United States that rely on foreign imports as inputs in their products, and they&#8217;ve been holding off on hiring; they&#8217;ve been holding off on development because they don&#8217;t know what&#8217;s coming down the pike.
I am still a constitutional conservative who likes the balance of powers, the checks and balances, who still remembers when the legislature was not a vestigial organ of government, and would like that to remain the case.
For conservatives, I understand: People love President Trump. I support President Trump as a general rule.
With that said, powers delegated to the executive branch do not flow back to the legislative branch very often. You&#8217;re not going to like those limits when they are applied to a president of a party to which you do not belong.
I&#8217;m finding it kind of ironic today, looking at all the Democrats who are celebrating this as a big victory. They wouldn&#8217;t be celebrating this if they understood it&#8217;s going to apply when a Democrat is in charge.
No one has expanded executive power in my lifetime like Barack Obama. And Joe Biden expanded it even further.
The notion that Democrats are not in love with executive power is insane to me.
It&#8217;s one of the reasons I don&#8217;t like the Democratic Party, because they keep wanting to expand the executive power at the cost of the checks and balances established by the Founders.

TOPSHOT-US-POLITICS-COURT-TARIFF-TRUMP-BRIEFING

SCOTUS Knocks Down Trump’s Tariffs

Opinion

SCOTUS

The Supreme Court delivered a long-awaited decision on Friday, striking down President Trump’s sweeping International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) tariffs. But while the court ruled on the legality of the tariffs themselves, it did not address whether the United States must refund more than $200 billion in revenue already collected.
“The court’s decision is likely to generate other serious practical consequences in the near term. One issue will be refunds,” dissenting Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote. “Refunds of billions of dollars would have significant consequences for the U.S. Treasury.”
Ruling only on the narrow legal question before them, the court did not establish a framework for refunds. Such a framework will likely be established by lower courts, particularly the United States Court of International Trade, which ruled against Trump’s tariff decision.
In response to the Supreme Court decision, President Trump said, “They take months and months to write an opinion, and they don’t even discuss that point. We’ve taken in hundreds of billions of dollars … wouldn’t you think they’d put one sentence in there saying keep the money or don’t keep the money?”
If refunds are ultimately required, the United States Treasury would be tasked with reimbursing importers for the levies they incurred — a process Kavanaugh deemed a “mess,” as refunds could be required to be issued to foreign nations, consumers, and manufacturers depending on court outcomes.
The president of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, Maya MacGuineas, said that with the federal deficit in mind, the ruling was very bad news: &#8220;With today’s Supreme Court ruling affirming the illegality of President Trump’s emergency tariffs, the country will now be about $2 trillion deeper in the hole. With the national debt already the size of the entire U.S. economy and interest on the debt costing more than $1 trillion this year, this is very bad news. Congress should work quickly to fill that hole.&#8221;
She added, &#8220;We are in a dismal fiscal situation, and it just got worse.”
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said the $200 billion in tariff revenue could be used to shrink the $2 trillion deficit and pay down the $36 trillion debt.
Beyond budgetary concerns, the ruling could impact Trump’s broader use of tariffs as a foreign policy tool during negotiations. In February, he threatened to impose tariffs on countries that do business with Iran, citing the country’s repression of protesters, support for proxy terrorist groups, and continued pursuit of nuclear capabilities. In May, the president warned China that tariffs would increase if the country continued not to ship rare earth minerals to the United States — materials used in products ranging from household appliances and automobiles to semiconductors for artificial intelligence chips.
In addition to bringing back jobs and supply chains to the United States, Trump argues he needs tariffs to address a national security concern: the hollowing out of the manufacturing base. In an executive order signed on Liberation Day, Trump explained that the inability to scale advanced manufacturing undermines “critical supply chains; and rendered our defense-industrial base dependent on foreign adversaries.”
At a White House press conference on Friday, the president confirmed he will continue issuing tariffs under authorities granted to him through Section 232, rather than relying on the broader emergency powers provided under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA).

President Trump Holds “Make America Wealthy Again Event” In White House Rose Garden

Tariffs Overturned: What Happens To The $200 Billion Already Collected?

Scott Bessent

Justice Brett Kavanaugh said Friday that President Donald Trump could likely preserve most of his “Liberation Day” tariffs despite the Supreme Court&#8217;s decision striking them down. 
Writing in dissent, Kavanaugh argued that while the Court <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/scotus-strikes-down-most-of-trumps-tariffs-complicating-his-bid-to-rewrite-international-trade?topStoryPosition=undefined&amp;author=Zach+Jewell&amp;category=News&amp;elementPosition=0&amp;row=1&amp;rowHeadline=Top+Stories&amp;rowType=Top+Stories&amp;title=SCOTUS+Strikes+Down+Most+Of+Trump%E2%80%99s+Tariffs%2C+Complicating+His+Bid+To+Rewrite+International+Trade">rejected</a> Trump’s reliance on the International Economic Emergency Powers Act (IEEPA), other federal statutes could authorize most of the tariffs.  
“Although I firmly disagree with the Court’s holding today, the decision might not substantially constrain a President’s ability to order tariffs going forward,” he wrote. “That is because numerous other federal statutes authorize the President to impose tariffs and might justify most (if not all) of the tariffs at issue in this case—albeit perhaps with a few additional procedural steps that IEEPA, as an emergency statute, does not require.”
Kavanaugh pointed specifically to the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, the Trade Act of 1974, and the Tariff Act of 1930 as alternative statutory bases that could authorize the tariffs Trump sought to impose. 
“IEEPA merely allows the President to impose tariffs somewhat more efficiently to deal with foreign threats during national emergencies,” he said. “In essence, the Court today concludes that the President checked the wrong statutory box by relying on IEEPA rather than another statute to impose these tariffs.”
Kavanaugh&#8217;s position mirrors one previously articulated by Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent. In December, Bessent <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2025/12/03/bessent-says-us-will-be-able-to-replicate-tariffs-even-if-it-loses-supreme-court-decision.html">said</a> multiple sections of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 could be used to “recreate the exact tariff structure” Trump imposed through IEEPA. 
In his dissent, Kavanaugh argued that both history and law were on Trump’s side. Specifically, Kavanaugh pointed to the global tariffs imposed by former President Richard Nixon in 1971 as an example of a president imposing broad trade restrictions during an economic crisis.
“Statutory text, history, and precedent demonstrate that the answer is clearly yes: Like quotas and embargoes, tariffs are a traditional and common tool to regulate importation,” he said. 
Kavanaugh also argued that it would be illogical to allow the president to block all trade with China while barring him from imposing tariffs on Chinese imports. 
“As [the plaintiffs] interpret the statute, the President could, for example, block all imports from China but cannot order even a $1 tariff on goods imported from China,” Kavanaugh said. “That approach does not make much sense.”
Kavanaugh also warned that the ruling could raise questions about whether the government must issue refunds for tariffs already collected and potentially affect trade deals negotiated under those tariffs. 
Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito joined Kavanaugh&#8217;s dissent. Thomas also wrote a separate opinion arguing that Congress had delegated tariff authority to the president.

President Trump Delivers State Of The Union Address To Joint Session Of Congress

Kavanaugh Lays Out How Trump Could Recreate Tariffs Through Other Laws

Brett Kavanaugh

WATCH: Trump Reacts To Tariff Ruling In Surprise Briefing — LIVE UPDATES

White House

The United States economy grew more slowly than expected in the fourth quarter, as investment gains were offset by declines in government spending and exports. 
Gross domestic product increased at a 1.4% annualized rate last quarter, the Commerce Department’s Bureau of Economic Analysis said in its initial estimate of fourth-quarter GDP on Friday. The figure missed the Dow Jones estimate, which had forecasted that GDP would rise at a 2.5% pace. 
Trump blamed the ‘Democrat Shutdown’ for the fourth-quarter economic slowdown. 
“The Democrat Shutdown cost the United States of America at least two points in GDP. That’s why they are doing it, in mini form, again. No shutdowns!” The President added, “Also, lower interest rates,” and that Fed Chair Jerome Powell “is the worst.” 
Just four days into the government shutdown that began in October, Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fl_eu8vxU9Q">warned</a> that the shutdown could result in weekly losses of $15B in GDP. Oxford Economics predicted the shutdown would reduce economic growth by 0.1 to 0.2 percentage points per week. They estimated a quarter-long shutdown would have impacts of 1.2 to 2.4 percentage points. The government shutdown ultimately lasted around half a quarter before ending in November. 
White House spokesperson Kush Desai told the Daily Wire the numbers showed a robust private sector-led economy despite the shutdown. 
“Today’s GDP report showed that President Trump continues to deliver robust private sector-led economic growth with strong consumption and investment. Even with the Democrat Government Shutdown dragging the country down last fall, GDP growth for 2025 smashed the Federal Reserve, Congressional Budget Office, and International Monetary Fund’s ‘expert’ predictions. He added, “As President Trump’s proven agenda of tax cuts, deregulation, tariffs, and energy abundance continues taking effect and as trillions in investments continue pouring in, America’s economic comeback is set to only accelerate in 2026.” 
Not all economists agreed. Chief Economist for Europac Peter Schiff <a href="https://x.com/PeterSchiff/status/2024844808863281222">said</a>, &#8220;Data confirms Trump&#8217;s &#8216;hottest economy&#8217; is cooling fast.&#8221;
Many economists argue that President Trump&#8217;s tariffs curb economic growth. On Friday, the Supreme Court issued a ruling striking down Trump&#8217;s use of sweeping tariffs through the International Emergency Economic Power Act (IEEPA).
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer <a href="https://x.com/SenSchumer/status/2024869159197118878">said</a> the Supreme Court ruling was &#8220;a victory for the wallets of every American consumer.&#8221;

President Trump Tours Ford Rouge Complex In Michigan

Why Trump Says Democrats Shaved ‘Two Points’ Off Economic Growth

Trump Blames 'Democrat Shutdown' For GDP Miss

Democrat Shutdown

The Supreme Court ruled on Friday that President Donald Trump exceeded his constitutional authority when he used the International Economic Emergency Powers Act to impose sweeping tariffs on most of the world.
In a long-anticipated <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/24-1287_4gcj.pdf">decision</a>, the court ruled 6-3 that Trump&#8217;s justification for the tariffs under the Emergency Powers Act went &#8220;beyond the President&#8217;s legitimate reach.&#8221; Chief Justice John Roberts was joined in the majority opinion by the three liberal justices, along with Trump-appointed Justices Amy Coney Barrett and Neil Gorsuch. Conservative Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Brett Kavanaugh dissented.
<iframe loading="lazy" title="LIVE: Supreme Court WRECKS Trump&#039;s Tariffs" width="500" height="375" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/KHJxPPyswZc?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
The court rebuked Trump&#8217;s use of the International Economic Emergency Powers Act, or IEEPA, stating that the act passed by Congress in 1977 makes no mention of &#8220;tariffs&#8221; or &#8220;duties&#8221; in the &#8220;lengthy list of powers&#8221; given to the president.
&#8220;That omission is notable in light of the significant but specific powers Congress did go to the trouble of naming. It stands to reason that had Congress intended to convey the distinct and extraordinary power to impose tariffs, it would have done so expressly—as it consistently has in other tariff statutes,&#8221; the Supreme Court stated.
&#8220;We hold that IEEPA does not authorize the president to impose tariffs,&#8221; the majority added in the opinion written by Roberts.
Not all of Trump&#8217;s tariffs were struck down in the decision, as the president did not invoke the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to impose certain tariffs on aluminum and steel. Trump&#8217;s so-called reciprocal tariffs on most of the world, including massive duties on China, are affected by the high court&#8217;s decision. Trump&#8217;s 25% tariffs on Canada and Mexico over their failure to prevent fentanyl trafficking are also affected.
While the ruling is a loss for Trump, the White House believes there are other avenues for Trump to keep his tariffs in place. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said in December that the president has three other avenues to impose the wide-ranging tariffs, pointing to provisions in the 1962 Trade Act that the administration could use to “recreate the exact tariff structure.”
Still, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act was the most effective way to impose global tariffs, according to Bessent.
“There are lots of other authorities that can be used, but IEEPA is by far the cleanest, and it gives the US and the president the most negotiating authority,” he said. “The others are more cumbersome, but they can be effective.”
Leading up to the decision, Trump warned of significant damage to the United States if the Supreme Court ruled against him. In a Truth Social post earlier this week, the president wrote, &#8220;Because of Tariffs, our Country is financially, AND FROM A NATIONAL SECURITY STANDPOINT, FAR STRONGER AND MORE RESPECTED THAN EVER BEFORE.”
The president has used the tariffs as leverage to urge companies to invest in U.S. manufacturing and to pressure foreign governments to negotiate with the United States on foreign policy and peace proposals.
A key question at the center of Friday’s decision was whether Trump’s tariffs should be considered a tax, pitting Trump’s foreign policy and economic agenda against Congress’ authority over taxation.
Trump’s “reciprocal tariffs” were challenged by multiple companies, including Costco, which filed lawsuits in federal courts, arguing that the tariffs would force them to significantly raise prices to continue importing the goods they offer their customers. The case made its way to the Supreme Court after the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled in August that Trump’s use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to impose tariffs violated the Constitution.
Trump was the first president to use the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to impose tariffs. Since its enactment in 1977, the law has been used by presidents to sanction foreign adversaries and terrorist regimes.
Trump’s Solicitor General, John Sauer, argued before the court in November that national emergencies related to the fentanyl crisis and America’s declining industrial base justify Trump’s use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to impose tariffs.
“President Trump has declared that these emergencies are country killing and not sustainable, that they threaten the bedrock of our national and economic security, and that fixing them will make America a strong, financially viable, and respected country again,” he said in his opening argument. “Due to IEEPA tariffs, President Trump has negotiated agreements worth trillions of dollars with major trading partners, including most recently China.”

Menu