New 15% Global Tariff Faces Legal Challenges After Supreme Court Ruling

The US has a new 15% global tariff after the Supreme Court blocked older ones. This is a big change from the previous policy.
By Newsroom | Trade Policy, US Economy |

Donald Trump’s trade policies, particularly his use of tariffs, have encountered significant legal challenges. A recent Supreme Court decision curtailed his authority to impose broad tariffs under a specific emergency statute. In response, the administration has implemented new tariff measures. However, the future impact on countries that previously struck trade deals with the U.S. to secure lower tariffs remains uncertain, as the effectiveness of these new policies is being closely observed.

They Did Deals With Trump to Get Lower Tariffs. Now They Are Stuck. - 1

Context of Tariffs and Trade Agreements

President Trump has consistently utilized tariffs as a key element of his trade strategy, aiming to reshape global trade dynamics and bolster domestic industries. This approach has led to a complex web of trade actions and agreements.

They Did Deals With Trump to Get Lower Tariffs. Now They Are Stuck. - 2

  • Tariff Implementation: The Trump administration imposed tariffs on a wide range of imported goods. These were often justified as necessary measures to protect American jobs and industries.

  • Supreme Court Ruling: A pivotal moment occurred when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that President Trump had overstepped his authority by imposing sweeping tariffs on imports using a 1970s emergency statute. This decision specifically addressed tariffs implemented under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA).

  • New Tariff Measures: Following the Supreme Court's decision, the White House quickly announced a new, across-the-board 15 percent tariff on many imports. This new policy was enacted under a different legal provision, suggesting an attempt to circumvent the limitations imposed by the court.

  • Bilateral Agreements: Prior to the Supreme Court's ruling, several countries entered into agreements with the U.S. to lower or eliminate tariffs on specific goods. These deals were often contingent on broader tariff policies remaining in place.

Trade Deals to Avoid Tariffs

Several nations negotiated bilateral trade agreements with the United States, seemingly as a strategy to mitigate the impact of Trump’s escalating tariff policies.

Read More: Supreme Court on February 20, 2026, Stops President Trump from Using Emergency Law for Tariffs, Affecting Businesses and Billions in Refunds

They Did Deals With Trump to Get Lower Tariffs. Now They Are Stuck. - 3

  • Cambodia: Agreed to remove tariffs on U.S. industrial and agricultural products. The agreement also included provisions for trade facilitation and good regulatory practices.

  • Indonesia: Committed to eliminating 99 percent of its tariff barriers on industrial and agricultural goods. Standard clauses on trade facilitation and regulatory practices were also part of this deal.

These agreements suggest a pattern of countries attempting to secure favorable terms in the face of broad U.S. trade actions.

They Did Deals With Trump to Get Lower Tariffs. Now They Are Stuck. - 4

The Supreme Court's Decision and Its Ramifications

The Supreme Court's ruling has cast a significant shadow over the previous tariff structures, creating uncertainty for ongoing trade relationships.

  • Overreach of Authority: The court found that President Trump’s use of the emergency statute to impose tariffs on imports from nearly every country exceeded his legal powers. This ruling affected tariffs that constituted approximately half of the total tariffs imposed.

  • Impact on Revenue: The tariffs that were struck down by the Supreme Court represented a substantial source of revenue for the U.S. Treasury. The ruling has raised questions about potential refunds of billions of dollars collected through these tariffs.

  • Market Reaction: The stock market reacted positively to the Supreme Court’s tariff ruling, with major stock indexes recovering from earlier losses.

The New Tariff Landscape

In the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision, the administration has moved swiftly to establish a new tariff framework.

  • Across-the-Board Tariff: A new 15 percent global tariff was announced shortly after the Supreme Court’s verdict. This blanket tariff applies to many imported goods.

  • Different Legal Basis: This new tariff policy operates under a different legal provision than the one invalidated by the Supreme Court, indicating a strategic shift in legal approach.

  • Existing Tariffs: It is important to note that some tariffs, particularly those imposed on China under Section 301 and those related to national security under Section 232 (e.g., steel, aluminum, automobiles), were implemented under different statutory authorities and may remain unaffected by the Supreme Court's ruling. These can be complex, with provisions ensuring that certain goods are not subject to multiple overlapping tariffs (e.g., steel tariffs do not also trigger tariffs on Canadian or Mexican goods, and vice versa).

Expert Perspectives

Analysts observe that President Trump remains a strong proponent of using tariffs as a negotiation tool, and there are no immediate signs that these tariffs have led to a revival of domestic manufacturing as initially promised. The recent court ruling and the subsequent implementation of new tariffs highlight a continuous effort to leverage trade policy, albeit through evolving legal channels.

Conclusion and Future Considerations

The Supreme Court's decision has significantly altered the landscape of U.S. tariffs, invalidating broad emergency measures enacted under a specific statute. While the administration has introduced new tariffs, their long-term effectiveness and implications for countries that previously negotiated trade deals remain subjects of ongoing scrutiny.

Read More: US Stock Market Faces 2026 Crash Fears Due to High AI Valuations

  • The effectiveness of the newly implemented 15 percent global tariff will be a key area to monitor.

  • The legal challenges to tariffs enacted under different statutes, such as Section 232 and Section 301, will continue to be a critical factor.

  • The administration’s stated intention to use tariffs as a negotiation tactic suggests that trade policy will remain dynamic.

The impact on countries that made concessions to secure lower tariffs in the past is uncertain, as they now face a new set of U.S. trade policies that may or may not honor previous arrangements.

Frequently Asked Questions

Q: Why did the Supreme Court stop some of Trump's tariffs?
The Supreme Court said President Trump used a law from the 1970s incorrectly to put tariffs on many goods. This ruling stopped tariffs that were about half of all tariffs the US had put in place.
Q: What new tariff did the US government announce after the court ruling?
After the court's decision, the US government quickly said there would be a new 15 percent tariff on many imported items. This new tariff uses a different law than the one the court blocked.
Q: How will the new 15% global tariff affect countries that had trade deals with the US?
It is not clear yet how the new 15 percent tariff will affect countries that made deals to get lower tariffs before. These countries may face higher costs or need to make new agreements.
Q: Are all of Trump's tariffs now gone because of the Supreme Court decision?
No, not all tariffs are gone. Tariffs on China and those for national security reasons, like on steel and aluminum, were put in place using different laws and might still be active.
Q: What do experts think about Trump's use of tariffs and the new policy?
Experts believe President Trump still wants to use tariffs to help trade negotiations. They have not seen evidence that these tariffs have helped bring back manufacturing jobs in the US as planned.