Legal AF by MeidasTouch – Episode Summary

Episode Title: Trump Tariffs Struck Down by Supreme Court
Release Date: February 20, 2026
Hosts: Ben Meiselas, Michael Popok, Karen Friedman Agnifilo (not present in discussion)

Overview

This episode of Legal AF delivers in-depth, immediate analysis of the Supreme Court’s landmark decision striking down Donald Trump’s use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose sweeping tariffs during peacetime. Ben Meiselas and Michael Popok dissect the constitutional, economic, and political ramifications of the Court’s 6–3 ruling, which decisively affirms Congress’s exclusive power to tax, rejects broad executive interpretation of “emergency” powers, and signals a potential shift in the Court’s approach to presidential overreach.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

Supreme Court Decision: The Ruling and Its Basis

[02:01–04:46]

• The Supreme Court ruled 6–3 that Donald Trump did not have authority under the IEEPA to unilaterally impose peacetime tariffs, invalidating approximately $200 billion in tariffs previously collected.
• Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the majority, joined by Justices Sotomayor, Kagan, Gorsuch, Barrett, and Jackson. Dissent: Kavanaugh, Thomas, Alito.
• IEEPA, enacted in 1977, gives the President certain economic tools to address foreign threats, but does not delegate Congress’s Article I, Section 8 power of taxation or the imposition of tariffs.
• Roberts’ majority stresses the Constitution’s clear separation of powers and insists that Congress would need to explicitly relinquish such powers—not merely hint at it through vague statutory language (“regulate”).
• The ruling is retroactive: tariffs are void “ab initio”—meaning the government must pay back collected tariffs to affected companies.

Economic Impacts and Realities of Tariffs

[04:46–09:18]

• Michael Popok highlights that Trump’s tariffs were in fact paid for by American businesses and consumers—not foreign entities.
• The companies that brought the case, such as Learning Resources, are entitled to refunds.
• Customs and Border Protection had already prepared mechanisms to return these funds in anticipation of the ruling.
• The refund does not automatically flow to consumers, but to the businesses who paid the tariffs; whether consumer prices drop depends on each company’s choice.

Statutory Interpretation and Judicial Debate

[09:18–12:45]

• The justices discuss how statutory language, not legislative history or broad doctrines, should be the primary guide.
• Justices Kagan, Sotomayor, and Jackson focused on the plain meaning of the statute: “Just read the statute."
• Other justices considered the major questions doctrine—the idea that Congress cannot delegate significant powers to the Executive without clear, explicit language.
• The Court viewed Trump’s attempted power grab as unprecedented and not supported by IEEPA’s wording.
• Quotes from the oral arguments anticipated this outcome, as several justices questioned both the statutory authority and the retroactivity/implementation.

Constitutional Structure and Checks on Power

[12:45–18:03]

• Ben Meiselas emphasizes Article I, Section 8’s exclusive grant to Congress of the taxation power, including tariffs.
• He highlights Justice Gorsuch’s worry about “unconstrained” presidential power:

  “Our system of separated powers and checks and balances threatens to give way to the continual and permanent accretion of power in the hands of one man. This is no recipe for a republic." – Justice Neil Gorsuch [16:36]

• Roberts in the majority opinion pushes back on the notion that mere presidential declaration of emergency grants unchecked power:

  "...the government reads IEPA to give the President power to unilaterally impose unbounded tariffs... On this reading, the President is unconstrained..." – Chief Justice Roberts [17:20]

• The majority found it telling that no previous president had used IEEPA for tariffs in its 50-year history.

Political and Judicial Context

[18:03–21:55]

• Popok suggests Gorsuch and Barrett may be attempting to claw back presidential authority they previously expanded (e.g., immunity decisions).
• He explains the majority wasn’t about expanding or narrowing the major questions doctrine, but about the clear, limited statutory language.
• The ruling applies strictly to peacetime; the justices left open what powers might exist during genuine war.
• Trump’s next moves are uncertain, but this closes off the IEEPA "shortcut" for future sweeping tariffs.

Economic Fallout and Aftermath

[20:30–21:55]

• The commerce implications are significant: businesses may get refunded, but whether consumer prices drop is doubtful.
• The decision further strains the Trump administration's already faltering economic metrics: GDP was already down before the ruling, with the impact likely to worsen.

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On the secret of tariffs:

  "That's the dirty little secret about Trump's tariffs. It wasn't paid for by Japan or Canada or Mexico or any of the other 200 countries that he tariffed. It was paid for by the American consumer and businesses." – Michael Popok [04:48]

• On judicial interpretation:

  “Just read the statute. The statute, the statute. Read it. And if you read it, it is very clear.” – Michael Popok [09:49]

• On Congress's intent:

  “Why would Congress give up its entire constitutional rights in IEEPA without saying, we hereby give up all of our constitutional rights? Why would they be so cute and coy about it and hide a delegation ... in the word regulate? Does that make any sense at all?” – Ben Meiselas [14:09]

• On the limits of presidential power:

  “Without doctrines like major questions, our system of separated powers and checks and balances threatens to give way to the continual and permanent accretion of power in the hands of one man. This is no recipe for a republic.” – Justice Gorsuch, cited by Ben Meiselas [16:36]

• On Supreme Court discipline:

  “At least the Supreme Court knows how to read a statute. It isn't going to bend over backwards and twist itself into a pretzel to give the presidency a power.” – Michael Popok [08:59]

Important Timestamps

• [02:01] – Breaking news: The Supreme Court strikes down Trump tariffs under IEEPA
• [04:46] – Popok explains who actually paid the tariffs and the economic impact
• [09:30] – Breakdown of statutory interpretation: major questions doctrine and just reading the statute
• [12:45] – Full reading of the statutory powers under IEEPA
• [14:09] – Argument refuting Congress intended to delegate taxation powers
• [16:36] – Gorsuch’s notable warning on executive overreach
• [17:20] – Roberts’ language in the majority opinion about presidential overreach
• [18:03] – Popok on “walking back the monster” of executive power
• [20:00] – Discussion of the economic fallout and implementation details
• [21:55] – Closing summary and recap of the decision

Conclusion

This episode offers a comprehensive, lucid breakdown of a historic legal decision, combining real-time legal expertise, analysis of statutory and constitutional language, and commentary on broader judicial trends. The hosts contextualize the economic and political stakes and anticipate future legal battles over executive power, all while maintaining a dynamic, accessible tone. Essential listening for anyone tracking the intersection of law, politics, and presidential authority in the U.S.