Letters from an American: February 20, 2026 – Episode Summary
Host: Heather Cox Richardson
Date: February 21, 2026
Theme: The U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling against Trump’s “Liberation Day Tariffs” and the implications for American democracy, economics, and presidential power.
Main Theme Overview
This episode explores the Supreme Court’s landmark 6-3 decision declaring President Donald J. Trump’s sweeping tariff regime unconstitutional under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), and places the ruling within the broader context of America’s constitutional order, economic well-being, and threats to democratic norms. Heather Cox Richardson narrates the history, consequences, legal interpretations, and political reactions surrounding both the tariffs and the emergency powers claimed by Trump during his second term.
Key Discussion Points & Insights
1. Background on Trump’s Tariffs and Use of Emergency Powers
-
Trump’s Emergency Declarations
- Trump declared national emergencies over drug influxes and trade deficits, invoking the IEEPA to raise tariffs unilaterally—a move not explicitly authorized by the law.
“Trump claimed the authority under IPA to impose a sweeping new tariff system that upended the free trade principles that have underpinned the economy… since World War II.”
— [00:01]
- Trump declared national emergencies over drug influxes and trade deficits, invoking the IEEPA to raise tariffs unilaterally—a move not explicitly authorized by the law.
-
Congressional Power and Constitutionality
- The Constitution gives Congress the exclusive power to levy taxes and tariffs. With IEEPA, Congress only intended to grant very limited presidential authority tied to real emergencies.
- Trump’s actions far exceeded those limits, setting up the legal challenge.
2. Economic Impact of “Liberation Day Tariffs”
-
Economic Data
- Tariffs and a government shutdown slowed economic growth to 1.4% in Q4 of 2025, down from 2.8% in 2024; job growth also slowed dramatically.
“The latest report… shows that tariffs and the government shutdown slowed growth to 1.4%, bringing overall growth down….”
— [00:03]
- Tariffs and a government shutdown slowed economic growth to 1.4% in Q4 of 2025, down from 2.8% in 2024; job growth also slowed dramatically.
-
Cost to Americans
- The Tax Foundation estimated tariffs cost U.S. households about $1,000 in 2025; rising to $1,300–$1,700 in 2026 according to government and lawmakers’ estimates.
“It was a huge tax increase on the American people, imposed without reference at all to Congress, which is the only government body with the power to raise taxes now.”
— [00:09]
- The Tax Foundation estimated tariffs cost U.S. households about $1,000 in 2025; rising to $1,300–$1,700 in 2026 according to government and lawmakers’ estimates.
3. Political and Legal Analysis
-
Parallel to Carl Schmitt’s Authoritarian Theories
- Richardson draws explicit parallels between Trump’s “emergency powers” governance style and the political theory of Carl Schmitt, who argued democracy is about wielding power and suppressing opposition during emergencies.
“Much of Schmidt's philosophy centered around the idea that… power belongs to the man who can exploit emergencies that create exceptions to the constitutional order…”
— [00:05] - Trump himself:
“I have the right to do anything I want to do. I'm the president of the United States. If I think our country is in danger… I can do it.”
— Trump, August 26, 2025 [00:06]
- Richardson draws explicit parallels between Trump’s “emergency powers” governance style and the political theory of Carl Schmitt, who argued democracy is about wielding power and suppressing opposition during emergencies.
-
Unprecedented Expansion of Emergency Powers
- Trump has declared at least nine emergencies and one “crime emergency” in 13 months—far outpacing precedents.
- His use of tariffs as a personal foreign policy and economic tool: retaliation, reward, and punishment on apparent whim (e.g., for Bolsonaro, real estate deals in Vietnam).
- Constant and unpredictable rate changes destabilized the global economy—Chinese tariff rates going from 10% to 145% in weeks.
“Trump changed tariff rates, apparently on his own whim.”
— [00:08]
4. Supreme Court’s Ruling & Reactions
-
Court’s Reasoning
- The majority held that Trump’s claim of authority to levy tariffs as an “emergency” economic power was unconstitutional.
- Noted deep skepticism towards attempts to claim open-ended emergency powers.
-
Notable Commentary
- Simon Rosenberg:
“All this reinforces that the tariffs were arguably both the most reckless act and the greatest abuse of power by a president in American history...”
— [00:11] - Ryan Goodman:
“…the justices in the majority expressed deep skepticism of claims to open ended emergency powers, although it is not at all clear that they will recognize the same problem in other contexts.”
— [00:12]
- Simon Rosenberg:
-
Trump’s Public Response
- Trump, at breakfast with governors, is “visibly frustrated,” promising to “do something about the courts.”
— [00:12] - In a subsequent 45-minute tirade, he attacks both Republican and Democratic justices, notably praising Justice Brett Kavanaugh for dissenting.
“Those justices…the Republicans in the majority, are just being fools and lap dogs for the rhinos and the radical left Democrats…”
— Trump [00:13] - He asserts:
“I have the right to do tariffs, and I've always had the right to do tariffs, and it's all been approved by Congress, so there's no reason to do it.”
— Trump [00:15]
- Trump, at breakfast with governors, is “visibly frustrated,” promising to “do something about the courts.”
5. Aftermath, Political Fallout, and Ongoing Uncertainty
-
Immediate Reaction
- Within hours, Trump signs another order for a 10% global tariff using different statutory authority for 150 days—raising questions about legality and purpose.
- Economist Justin Wolfers questions the efficacy and logic:
“If it's about leverage, ask how much leverage do you get from a tariff that disappears in 150 days? ...It's a tax. That's all it is.”
— [00:16]
-
Calls for Redress and Refunds
- Democrats propose legislation to refund the illegally collected tariffs to U.S. businesses.
- Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker sends a literal invoice to Trump:
“Illinois families paid the bill. Time for Trump to pay us back.”
— [00:17] - Pritzker’s letter sharply rebukes the costs and impacts on Illinois families and farmers.
Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments
-
On Presidential Power:
“I have the right to do anything I want to do. I'm the president of the United States.”
— Donald Trump, August 26, 2025 [00:06] -
Historian’s Perspective:
“Trump’s reliance on tariffs was mostly about seizing power.”
— Heather Cox Richardson [00:04] -
On Legal, Economic Impact:
“Trump's tariffs cost the average American household about $1,000 in 2025. They projected that cost to be $1300 in 2026. Congress's Joint Economic Committee... say the actual cost has been $1700 per household.”
— [00:10] -
On Supreme Court Skepticism:
“The justices in the majority expressed deep skepticism of claims to open ended emergency powers...”
— Ryan Goodman [00:12] -
On Actionable Response:
“Illinois families paid the bill. Time for Trump to pay us back.”
— Gov. JB Pritzker [00:17]
Important Segment Timestamps
- [00:00]–[00:04]: Background and legal basis for the tariffs
- [00:04]–[00:07]: Economic and political impacts of the tariffs
- [00:07]–[00:11]: Comparison with authoritarian theories; historical and constitutional analysis
- [00:11]–[00:13]: Supreme Court decision, commentary from experts
- [00:13]–[00:16]: Trump’s reaction to the decision, new 10% global tariff
- [00:16]–[00:18]: Political and legal responses; introduction of refund legislation; Pritzker’s invoice
Summary
Heather Cox Richardson’s February 20, 2026, episode of Letters from an American provides a detailed, incisive examination of the Supreme Court’s ruling against Trump’s tariffs. The case becomes a lens on the dangers of unchecked emergency powers, the fragility of constitutional limits, and the real economic consequences faced by American families. Richardson traces the ideological roots and historical precedents, highlights expert opinions and partisan rifts, and foregrounds the ongoing struggle for accountability and the reassertion of Congressional authority in the wake of executive overreach.
