President Trump’s own Supreme Court appointees betrayed America First by striking down his vital tariffs, prompting his fiery public rebuke of Justices Gorsuch and Barrett as family embarrassments.
Story Snapshot
- Supreme Court rules 6-3 that Trump exceeded IEEPA authority with global tariffs, halting protectionist measures.
- Trump blasts appointees Gorsuch and Barrett for lacking courage, calling the decision an embarrassment to their families.
- Tariffs, imposed on Liberation Day April 2025, aimed to revive U.S. manufacturing but required congressional taxing power.
- Trump vows to reimpose tariffs using other laws, praising dissenting justices Thomas, Alito, and Kavanaugh.
- Ruling reinforces major questions doctrine, limiting executive overreach amid midterm tensions.
Supreme Court Strikes Down Trump’s Tariffs
On February 20, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a 6-3 decision in Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump, ruling President Trump exceeded his authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the majority opinion, emphasizing IEEPA regulates importation during emergencies but lacks explicit tariff authorization. Tariffs constitute revenue-raising taxes reserved for Congress. Justices Gorsuch and Barrett, both Trump appointees, joined the majority, with Gorsuch authoring a 46-page concurrence defending the major questions and non-delegation doctrines. This overturned sweeping global tariffs imposed last April 2025 on Liberation Day, the largest protectionist action since the Great Depression.
Trump’s Sharp Response to Betrayal
President Trump immediately responded at a White House news conference, expressing absolute shame for certain justices’ lack of courage. He specifically targeted Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett, his 2017 and 2020 appointees, declaring the ruling an embarrassment to their families. Later that evening at a Georgia steel factory rally, Trump reiterated tariffs’ necessity, warning the country would be in trouble without them. He claimed foreign interests influenced the court without evidence and praised dissenters Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Brett Kavanaugh for their strength. Trump declined direct regret over nominations but signaled deep disappointment in the defection of his appointees.
Background on America First Tariffs
Tariffs anchor Trump’s economic nationalism, building on first-term trade wars. In April 2025, he invoked IEEPA, from 1977 Trading with the Enemy Act amendments, to slap 25% duties on Canadian and Mexican imports plus broader global levies, bypassing Congress for emergency powers. Importers like Learning Resources sued, arguing tariffs demand congressional approval as taxing measures distinct from embargoes or quotas. Trump promoted tariffs in midterm messaging, crediting them for booming domestic steel production. Precedents like Nixon-era IEEPA use appeared in Kavanaugh’s 63-page dissent but failed against modern lack of clear authorization. The major questions doctrine proved decisive, requiring explicit congressional backing for extraordinary executive actions.
Stakeholders reveal fractured dynamics. Trump seeks tariff leverage for trade negotiations and economic revival. Gorsuch prioritized textual limits; Barrett offered a brief concurrence tempering major questions framing. Dissenters defended historical flexibility in foreign affairs. Plaintiff Learning Resources opposed revenue burdens on importers. This split among Trump’s six appointees undermines his court influence, energizing base frustrations over judicial roadblocks to America First policies.
JUST IN: Trump Nukes Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett Following Tariff Ruling | The Gateway Pundit | by Jordan Conradson https://t.co/DFXdNVe8gQ
— Ulrich đ¶đŽđđđ§ đŠđ»đđŹđđđŠđ§đ„đđŠ (@UKnuchel) February 21, 2026
Impacts and Path Forward
Short-term, the ruling halts tariff implementation pending lower court remedies, disrupting trade leverage and risking manufacturing gains. Domestic steel communities face setbacks while importers and consumers gain cost relief; allies like Canada and Mexico avoid hikes. Long-term, it strengthens limits on executive power via major questions doctrine, potentially spurring Congress to authorize tariffs explicitly or reviving non-delegation challenges. Politically, it exposes GOP judicial rifts ahead of midterms, fueling Trump’s defiance. As of February 21, Trump plans reimposition through other federal laws, signaling no surrender to unelected judges eroding presidential tools against globalism.
Sources:
Trump attacks Supreme Court justices after he is handed a tariff loss (Politico)
A breakdown of the court’s tariff decision (SCOTUSblog)
Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump (Justia Docket)
