The Daily – Special Episode: Trump’s Tariffs Struck Down

Date: February 20, 2026
Hosts: Natalie Kitroeff
Guest: Adam Liptak (Supreme Court Correspondent, The New York Times)
Main theme: The Supreme Court's historic decision to strike down President Trump’s tariffs—a ruling that directly challenges the core of Trump’s economic agenda and presidential authority.

Episode Overview

This special episode covers breaking news: the Supreme Court, in a landmark 6-3 decision, invalidated President Trump’s global tariffs, dealing a major setback to a central component of his economic—and political—policy. The discussion with Supreme Court correspondent Adam Liptak analyzes the Court’s reasoning, the division among conservative justices, the practical impacts on the economy and presidential power, and what this may signal about the direction of the Court during Trump’s second term.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. The Supreme Court’s Ruling – What Happened and Why?

[00:32–04:27]

• The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 against President Trump’s sweeping tariffs, striking down the “cornerstone” of his economic policy.
• The majority decision, authored by Chief Justice Roberts, found that the law Trump relied on (The International Emergency Economic Powers Act, IEEPA) did not grant him authority to impose tariffs.
  • Adam Liptak: “The main statute he relies on does not authorize him to do what he wants to do. So this is a major blow from a court that not everyone expected to stand up to President Trump.” [02:18]
• The Court’s approach focused strictly on legislative language—not constitutional interpretation.
  • Roberts’ reasoning: Regulation of importation ≠ imposing taxes or tariffs. Tariffs are a form of taxation, and Congress has the exclusive power to tax.

2. The Court's Divisions: Conservatives Split

[04:27–07:51]

• The 6-3 vote was not along typical partisan lines.
  • The majority included Chief Justice Roberts, two Trump appointees (Gorsuch and Barrett), and the three liberal justices.
  • Dissent: Thomas, Alito, and Kavanaugh.
• The split reflected differing views on presidential power vs. Congressional authority.
  • Adam Liptak: “This is a major, major statement on presidential power. And to see the right side of the Court disagree is quite unusual.” [05:06]
• Justice Gorsuch emphasized caution against bypassing Congress for expedience:
  • Notable quote:

    “Yes, it can be tempting to bypass Congress when some pressing problem arises, but the deliberative nature of the legislative process was the whole point of its design. Through that process, the nation can tap the combined wisdom of the people’s elected representatives, not just that of one faction or man.” – Justice Gorsuch’s concurrence [06:30]

3. What Happens Next? Implications for Policy and the Economy

[07:51–12:45]

• Only tariffs imposed under the 1977 law (IEEPA) are struck down. Others, based on different statutes, remain intact.
  • Adam Liptak: “It does take out, in the short term, at least a great bulk of his tariffs program.” [08:23]
• President Trump responded with a combative press conference, vowing to revive tariffs under other legal authorities (e.g., Section 232, Section 301).
  • Trump, referencing Justice Kavanaugh’s dissent:

    “A president can actually charge more tariffs… all national security tariffs under Section 232 and existing Section 301 tariffs.” [10:11]

• These new avenues are more limited or cumbersome.
  • Natalie Kitroeff: “Is it fair to say… that they’re more, perhaps limited in nature, that we’d be talking more about a scalpel approach than a blunt instrument?”
    • Adam Liptak: “Yeah, that’s well put.” [11:23–11:36]
• Open questions remain about refunds for businesses that paid now-invalidated tariffs, leading to expected litigation.
  • Adam Liptak: “It’s an unwieldy situation. And the short answer… we don’t know what happens to these suits claiming refunds.” [12:45]

4. The Court’s Message to Trump—and Its Future Direction

[12:45–16:16]

• The decision challenges a perception of the Supreme Court as an automatic supporter of Trump, despite its conservative majority and previous rulings favoring him.
• This is the first major merits decision in Trump’s second term that rejects a Trump policy.
• Adam Liptak suggests the Court may be positioning itself as a counterweight to the executive, with big implications ahead (e.g., birthright citizenship, Federal Reserve leadership disputes).
  • Adam Liptak: “We may be entering an era where the Supreme Court shows itself to be a counterweight to the ambitions of President Trump.” [15:32]
• The visual of Supreme Court justices attending the upcoming State of the Union, after such a clash with the president, underscores the growing tension between branches of government.

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On the Court’s language and separation of powers:

  “There’s a value to deliberation, there’s a value to consensus, there’s a value to buy in, and there’s a value to letting people know what the rules are, rather than governing by impulse and whim.”
  – Adam Liptak [07:34]

• On the limits of Trump’s alternatives:

  “There are statutes that use the word tariffs…Congress knows how to give the president tariffs authority. The majority said IPA… is not one of those situations.”
  – Adam Liptak [10:58]

• On the historic nature of the moment:

  “It may capture and illustrate a clash between two branches of the government in a way we’ve never seen before.”
  – Adam Liptak [16:08]

Timestamps for Important Segments

• [00:32] – Introduction to the Supreme Court ruling
• [02:18] – Adam Liptak on Court’s unexpected rebuke of Trump
• [03:00] – Summary of the majority’s statutory reasoning
• [04:42] – Breakdown of the Court’s ideological split
• [06:30] – Justice Gorsuch’s notable concurring passage
• [08:08] – Which tariffs are now invalid, what remains
• [09:14] – Trump’s reaction and press conference remarks
• [10:58] – Narrowness of alternative tariff authorities
• [12:06] – Uncertainty about business refunds for tariffs
• [13:29] – What the decision says about this Supreme Court
• [15:32] – Emerging role of the Court as counterweight to Trump

Takeaways

• The Supreme Court decisively limited the president’s power to enact tariffs unilaterally under IEEPA, emphasizing Congressional authority.
• Conservatives split, signaling a willingness by some to check executive overreach even under a Republican president.
• Immediate practical consequences for major sections of Trump’s economic agenda, with further litigation and political drama likely.
• The Court’s willingness to challenge Trump on this foundational issue could signal new, less predictable judicial dynamics during his presidency.