Trump tariffs struck down: What's his backup plan?

Deutsche Welle

February 20, 2026

AI-Generated Deep Dive Summary

The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that most of President Donald Trump's tariffs are unconstitutional due to how they were implemented. The court's 6-3 decision focused on Trump's use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) of 1977, which it found exceeded presidential authority. This marks a significant political setback for Trump and his trade policies. Despite this, the administration has already prepared alternative strategies to reinstate tariffs under different legal frameworks. One potential tool the administration could use is Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, which allows the president to impose up to 15% tariffs for 150 days without congressional approval. Additionally, Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 permits tariffs on national security grounds, provided they are supported by a Commerce Department investigation. Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 also allows tariffs on countries violating trade agreements that harm U.S. businesses, with no limits on duration or amount. The ruling could have significant financial implications for importers and the government. Importers who paid the invalidated tariffs may be entitled to refunds, creating new challenges for customs authorities tasked with processing these claims. For businesses, this could provide some relief but is unlikely to offset future tariff-related costs. The government faces a double blow: not only will it lose revenue from refunds, but managing the administrative burden of processing returns will also be a challenge. This decision highlights ongoing debates about presidential power and its limits under the U.S. Constitution. While Trump's tariffs were a central part of his trade strategy, the ruling underscores the importance of adhering to legal and constitutional boundaries. The administration's ability to navigate this complex legal landscape will shape future trade policies and relations with trading partners. For readers interested in global trade policy and political developments, this ruling is a critical turning point. It not only impacts U.S. trade relations but also sets a precedent for how presidential authority is interpreted in matters of international commerce

Verticals

worldpolitics

Originally published on Deutsche Welle on 2/20/2026