President Donald Trump has imposed an additional 10 percent tariff on imports into the United States following a Supreme Court ruling that struck down many of his sweeping trade measures, delivering a major blow to his signature economic policy.
Trump signed the tariff order in the Oval Office, tweeting that it was “effective almost immediately,” after a year of using tariffs to pressure and punish both allied and rival nations. The new duty will take effect on February 24 for 150 days, with exemptions for certain sectors under separate investigations, including pharmaceuticals, as well as goods entering under the US-Mexico-Canada Agreement, according to a White House factsheet.
Even trading partners that previously negotiated tariff deals with the Trump administration will now face the 10 percent duty, regardless of prior agreements. A White House official indicated that the administration would later explore ways to “implement more appropriate or pre-negotiated tariff rates.”
Supreme Court ruling
Earlier on Friday, the conservative-majority Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that a 1977 law, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) used by Trump to impose sudden tariffs on individual countries does not authorize the President to levy duties.
Trump, who had appointed two of the justices in the majority, reacted angrily, claiming without evidence that the court was influenced by foreign interests.
“I’m ashamed of certain members of the court, absolutely ashamed, for not having the courage to do what’s right for our country,” Trump told reporters.
“In order to protect our country, a president can actually charge more tariffs than I was charging in the past,” he insisted, claiming the ruling left him “more powerful.”
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, speaking at the Economic Club of Dallas, said the administration’s alternative approach “will result in virtually unchanged tariff revenue in 2026.”
A major setback
The Supreme Court ruling did not affect sector-specific tariffs Trump had separately imposed on steel, aluminum, and other goods, nor ongoing government probes that could lead to additional tariffs. Nevertheless, the decision marked Trump’s biggest defeat at the Supreme Court since returning to the White House 13 months ago. The court has otherwise largely expanded his executive authority.
Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the majority, noted that “had Congress intended to convey the distinct and extraordinary power to impose tariffs through IEEPA, it would have done so expressly, as it consistently has in other tariff statutes.” He added, “IEEPA contains no reference to tariffs or duties.”
Wall Street reacted modestly, with share prices edging higher, while business groups, including the National Retail Federation, praised the ruling for providing “much-needed certainty” for companies.
Questions over refunds
The Trump administration had argued in court that companies would be refunded if the tariffs were deemed unlawful, but the ruling did not address the issue. Trump warned that years of litigation over refunds could follow. Justice Brett Kavanaugh, the lone Trump nominee siding with the administration, described the refund process as potentially “a mess.”
The University of Pennsylvania’s Penn Wharton Budget Model projected the ruling could lead to as much as $175 billion in refunds. California Governor Gavin Newsom, a likely 2028 Democratic presidential candidate, called for immediate restitution, saying: “Every dollar unlawfully taken must be refunded immediately, with interest. Cough up!”
Senator Elizabeth Warren cautioned that “there remains no legal mechanism for consumers and many small businesses to recoup the money they have already paid.”
The Budget Lab at Yale University estimated that consumers now face an average effective tariff rate of 9.1 percent after Friday’s decision, down from 16.9 percent, but still the highest since 1946, excluding 2025.
Global reaction
Close US trading partners, including the European Union and Britain, said they were reviewing the ruling. Canada, repeatedly targeted by Trump’s tariff threats, called the Supreme Court decision a recognition that the previous levies were “unjustified” but warned of potential future trade disruptions.
“Canada should prepare for new, blunter mechanisms to be used to reassert trade pressure, potentially with broader and more disruptive effects,” said Candace Laing, president of the Canadian Chamber of Commerce.
AFP
