Feb. 20, 2026 — Washington, D.C. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump that President Donald Trump’s tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) exceeded presidential authority, striking down measures targeting imports from China, Canada, Mexico and others to address trade deficits and fentanyl trafficking. In response, Trump issued a proclamation the same day imposing a 10% ad valorem import surcharge under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, effective Feb. 24 for 150 days to combat balance-of-payments deficits.
The Supreme Court opinion, led by Chief Justice John Roberts and joined by Justices Gorsuch, Barrett, Sotomayor, Kagan and Jackson in a splintered majority, held that IEEPA’s language to “regulate … importation” does not authorize tariffs, a core congressional taxing power requiring explicit delegation.
“Based on two words separated by 16 others in … IEEPA—‘regulate’ and ‘importation’—the President asserts the independent power to impose tariffs on imports from any country, of any product, at any rate, for any amount of time. Those words … cannot bear such weight.”
Roberts invoked the major questions doctrine, noting the tariffs’ vast economic impact, including over $200 billion collected in 2025, while rejecting foreign affairs exceptions. Dissenting Justice Brett Kavanaugh, joined by Justices Thomas and Alito, argued IEEPA covers tariffs as traditional regulation and warned of refund liabilities and trade uncertainties.
Trump’s proclamation declares “fundamental international payments problems” from deficits endangering national security, imposing the surcharge on most imports except critical minerals, energy products, pharmaceuticals, vehicles, USMCA goods from Canada and Mexico, and others listed in annexes.
“I find that fundamental international payments problems within the meaning of section 122 exist; that those problems significantly harm United States national interests, including economic and national security interests; and that special measures to restrict imports are required to address those problems.”
A White House fact sheet cites a $1.2 trillion goods trade deficit in 2024, aiming to boost domestic production and jobs.
Trump criticized the Court as “incompetent” and justices “unpatriotic,” per Politico, signaling potential hikes to 15% and stronger use of other statutes: “Any Country that wants to ‘play games’ with the ridiculous supreme court decision… will be met with a much higher Tariff.”
PBS NewsHour described the ruling as a blow to Trump’s agenda, though other laws remain available.
Social media reflected discussions, with Florida’s Voice noting the surcharge’s Feb. 24 start to stem dollar outflows, while Business Report highlighted global trade uncertainty.
