Supreme Court Ruling Upends Trump's Tariff Policy

Uncertainty looms for global businesses as the administration seeks new legal avenues to impose tariffs

Published on Feb. 22, 2026

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

The U.S. Supreme Court's ruling that struck down President Donald Trump's method of imposing tariffs has created additional uncertainty for trading partners and businesses worldwide. While most economists expect U.S. economic policy to remain largely unchanged, the legal and practical implications of the decision remain unclear.

Why it matters

The Supreme Court's ruling undermines a key pillar of the Trump administration's trade policy, which has roiled global commerce with unpredictable tariff actions. Businesses and governments now face an uncertain path forward as the U.S. seeks alternative legal justifications to maintain tariffs, raising concerns about the stability of the international trading system.

The details

The Supreme Court ruled that Trump's use of a 1977 law to rapidly impose broad tariffs was unconstitutional. However, the president has indicated he will try to invoke other legal provisions to continue imposing tariffs, potentially leading to a messy transition period. While most analysts do not expect immediate changes to global growth forecasts, the ruling injects further uncertainty into trade negotiations and the potential for tariff refunds.

  • The Supreme Court ruling was issued on Friday, February 21, 2026.
  • Trump said he would invoke a new tariff under a different law within days of the ruling.
  • Trump later announced he would raise the new tariff to 15% on Saturday, February 22, 2026.

The players

Donald Trump

The former U.S. president whose aggressive use of tariffs as a trade policy tool was struck down by the Supreme Court ruling.

Carsten Brzeski

The global head of macro for ING Research, who stated that Trump's tariff agenda will survive with new legal foundations and a messy transition period.

Raphael Bostic

The president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, who commented on the potential economic impact of the ruling and whether companies would receive tariff refunds.

Juan Pellerano-Rendón

A logistics expert and chief marketing officer at Swap, a software company, who cautioned that businesses should not expect a windfall from potential tariff refunds.

Neil Shearing

The group chief economist at Capital Economics, who noted that global trade has continued to grow despite the tariff uncertainty.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“The Supreme Court ruled on constitutional limits, not trade policy. Trump's tariff agenda survives with new legal foundations and a messy transition period.”

— Carsten Brzeski, Global Head of Macro, ING Research (ING Research)

“Is there a requirement to pay back the firms that have paid in the tariffs? If so, that's a lot of disruption.”

— Raphael Bostic, President, Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta (Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta)

“No serious operator is building their year around a potential tariff refund. There isn't a hidden 30% margin waiting to be unlocked if tariffs disappear tomorrow.”

— Juan Pellerano-Rendón, Chief Marketing Officer, Swap (Swap)

What’s next

The judge in the case will decide on Tuesday whether or not to allow Trump to impose a new 15% tariff under a different legal provision.

The takeaway

The Supreme Court's ruling injects further uncertainty into the global trading system, as the Trump administration seeks alternative legal avenues to maintain its tariff agenda. Businesses and governments must now navigate a complex and unpredictable policy landscape, raising concerns about the stability of international commerce.