Supreme Court Declares Global Tariffs Unconstitutional The 6‑3 decision issued on Feb. 21, 2026 held that the president cannot set tariffs unilaterally because taxation authority resides with Congress [1][2][3]. The ruling invalidated the “reciprocal” tariffs imposed since spring 2025 under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. Justices who voted against the administration emphasized the separation of powers, while the majority cited statutory limits on executive tax power.

President Announces Flat 10% Duty via Executive Order Trump responded that night, pledging to sign an order imposing a uniform 10 % tariff on all imports, limited to 150 days unless Congress extends it [1][2][3]. He framed the move as “certainty” for the economy and cited “very powerful alternatives” to the blocked program. The order leverages existing statutory authority that permits temporary trade measures pending legislative action.

Tariff Revenue and Economic Impact Remain Massive Federal data show the Treasury collected more than $133 billion from the previous tariffs, and the Congressional Budget Office projects a $3 trillion effect over the next decade [1][2][3]. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told the Economic Club of Dallas that alternative legal bases should keep total tariff collections “virtually unchanged” in 2026. Industry analysts warn that the flat rate could shift revenue patterns but not the overall fiscal magnitude.

Foreign Leaders and Industry React Differently Brazil’s Vice President and Industry Minister Geraldo Alckmin said the ruling “strengthens” U.S.–Brazil trade talks and that a uniform 10 % duty will not erode Brazil’s competitiveness [1][2][3]. Argentina’s Vice President Victoria Villarruel condemned the decision, warning it deepens reliance on China [2]. Steelmakers assert that national‑security steel tariffs survive the ruling, while Michigan apparel importer Linda Schlesinger‑Wagner estimates existing duties have already cost her business about $1 million and will force price hikes under the new 10 % rate [1][2].

Political Commentary Highlights Divergent Views Trump labeled the justices who voted against him “fools and lapdogs,” portraying the court’s action as a catalyst for decisive trade policy [2]. Senate Republicans such as Mitch McConnell and Susan Collins praised the decision as a reaffirmation of congressional authority [2]. Meanwhile, AP‑NORC polling indicates roughly six‑in‑ten Americans continue to disapprove of Trump’s trade agenda, a sentiment unchanged despite the policy shift [3].