Opinion | John Roberts Is Losing Patience With Trump

NYT Homepage

by Linda Greenhouse

February 25, 2026

AI-Generated Deep Dive Summary

Chief Justice John Roberts is showing signs of growing exasperation with President Donald Trump, as evidenced by his recent dissent in a high-profile tariff case. In *Learning Resources v. Trump*, Roberts authored a majority opinion declaring that Trump lacked the legal authority to impose tariffs on China under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. While his ruling was concise and focused on statutory interpretation, it included an unusually detailed—and seemingly unnecessary—paragraph detailing the chaotic and erratic nature of Trump’s tariff policies. This passage highlighted multiple instances of Trump adjusting or reversing tariffs, including significant increases and exemptions for certain goods like coffee and tea. Roberts’ inclusion of this “gratuitous” detail suggests he is using the opinion to send a broader message about the instability caused by Trump’s approach to international trade. The article argues that Roberts’ decision to include such a detailed account of Trump’s tariff actions goes beyond mere legal analysis, signaling his frustration with what he perceives as reckless and unpredictable leadership. This sentiment aligns with growing public and political criticism of Trump’s trade policies, which have been marked by frequent changes and accusations of being driven more by politics than sound economic reasoning. The piece also notes that while Roberts typically sides with the majority in emergency orders related to Trump’s policies, his tone in this case reflects a deeper concern about the long-term consequences of such actions. The inclusion of this critical paragraph is particularly notable given Roberts’ reputation for judicial restraint and his tendency to avoid injecting personal opinions into court decisions. By doing so, he appears to be drawing attention to what he views as the broader implications of Trump’s tariff regime—not just its legal flaws but also its impact on international relations and economic stability. The article suggests that this move reflects a growing divide within the Supreme Court over how to handle cases involving Trump, with liberal justices like Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson often dissenting in such matters. The piece concludes by

Verticals

newsgeneral

Originally published on NYT Homepage on 2/25/2026