• The U.S. Supreme Court struck down President Donald Trump's sweeping tariffs on February 20, 2026, ruling that Congress holds authority over taxes and tariffs, not the president via emergency declarations.
  • Trump has criticized Democratic-appointed judges for predictably ruling against his policies, amid ongoing Supreme Court challenges to his executive actions on tariffs, citizenship, trade, and elections.
  • The administration plans to pursue alternative measures to sustain tariffs, with Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent vowing to use other statutes, as Trump eyes a "game two" plan.

In a significant blow to President Donald Trump's second-term agenda, the U.S. Supreme Court on February 20, 2026, struck down his sweeping tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). The ruling, which came in a 6-3 decision, held that Congress retains authority over taxes and tariffs, not the president through emergency declarations. This decision follows Chief Justice John Roberts' late 2025 defense of judicial independence, with 2026 cases testing Trump's pushes on birthright citizenship, Federal Reserve changes, and trade via executive power alone.

Trump, in recent remarks, has criticized Democratic-appointed judges for what he calls predictable rulings against his policies. "Democrats on court will automatically vote no," he said, according to people familiar with his private comments. This criticism comes as lower courts, including Democrat-heavy state courts, have blocked Trump policies, prompting his claims of biased rulings. The administration has faced setbacks in cases involving tariffs, with importers like small businesses successfully suing, and states such as New York and California opposing the measures.

The tariff ruling disrupts Trump's trade war, which alienated international partners and spiked market uncertainty. Trump invoked IEEPA for "reciprocal" tariffs on April 2, 2025—dubbed "Liberation Day"—targeting trade deficits, and earlier tariffs on China, Canada, and Mexico over fentanyl trafficking. Without the emergency powers, the administration is scrambling for alternatives. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, in a statement, vowed to sustain tariffs via other statutes, with Trump eyeing national security tariffs or retaliatory measures against unfair trade practices. "We're not backing down," Bessent said, according to sources close to the matter.

Efforts to restructure trade policy have hit a snag, with the Supreme Court's decision based on non-delegation and major questions doctrines limiting executive overreach. In a midterm election year, Trump threatens executive action for nationwide voter ID without Congress, echoing his "Article II" expansive view of presidential power. Democrats and groups like the ACLU have forum-shopped in favorable state courts, adding to the political tensions. Public debate now centers on judicial bias, with Trump decrying automatic "no" votes from Democratic judges, while critics highlight the need for checks on presidential authority.

Looking ahead, experts predict losses for Trump on major issues due to legal doctrines against delegation. Courts may issue prospective rulings only, limiting immediate impact. In a term-limited year, the Supreme Court—bolstered by Trump appointees—may check power more boldly if his popularity wanes or Congress shifts. Pending cases involve Trump's birthright citizenship executive order and Federal Reserve alterations, with broader clashes including Senate blocking nominees and House opposition forcing judicial reliance. Global trade tensions persist over Trump's tariffs punishing non-trade issues, such as Brazil's Bolsonaro prosecution or India's Russian oil buys.

Correction: An earlier version of this article misstated the date of the Supreme Court ruling; it was February 20, 2026, not February 21.