Filenews 24 February 2026
By Mary Ellen Klas
The US Supreme Court's decision to overturn President Donald Trump's sweeping global tariffs is a resounding wake-up call for Congress. If the legislature had done its job last year and had not relinquished its tax jurisdiction when the White House embarked on this unprecedented journey into protectionism, we might not have been in the chaos we are facing now.
However, in the decision (6-3) it made on February 20, the Supreme Court not only affirmed the separation of powers, but also called on Congress to reassert its role as the body that holds the power of finance. Congress must assume its responsibilities and make it clear to the president that, if it wants to maintain its tariffs, it must work with them to achieve it.
This, of course, can require a lot of persuasion. A few hours after the decision, Trump gave a vague press conference, in which he underestimated both lawmakers and the court. It noted that some tariffs it had already imposed under a different legal authorisation had not been annulled by the courts and announced plans to extend others, using section 122 of the 1974 Trade Act. This provision allows the president to impose additional tariffs of up to 15%, but only for 150 days – not indefinitely.
Of course, if Trump wanted the tariffs to last longer than a few months, he could work with Congress on a long-term solution. But that would require agreeing that laws must be upheld and that Congress is a branch of government that it ought to respect.
Neither is going to happen. When a reporter asked Trump why he wasn't trying to get congressional approval, he replied, "You don't have to." He then stubbornly insisted: "I have the right to impose tariffs. I have always had the right to impose tariffs."
Congress has shown that most of its members are not proponents of tariffs, but Republican leaders do not seem willing to find the votes to do anything about it. Following the decision, House Speaker Mike Johnson said in a social media post that the White House and congressional leaders "will determine the best course of action in the coming weeks." Senate Majority Leader John Thune was cautious, hinting in a post that tariffs should be limited to addressing "unfair trade practices and levelling the playing field with foreign competitors."
In their ruling, the justices appeared to remind Congress that while the president cannot unilaterally impose unlimited emergency tariffs, he is not short of options as long as he cooperates with lawmakers.
Judge Neil Gorsuch, a conservative appointed by Trump in 2017, appeared to address the president and the MAGA wing of the Republican Party directly:
"For those who consider it important for the country to impose more tariffs, I understand that today's decision will be disappointing," Gorsuch wrote. "All I can offer them is that most important decisions that affect the rights and responsibilities of the American people (including the duty to pay taxes and duties) go through the legislative process for a reason."
Gorsuch acknowledged that "the legislative process can be difficult and time-consuming." He did not mention the president by name or his aversion to legislative compromises, but acknowledged that "it can be tempting to bypass Congress when an urgent problem arises."
Gorsuch said something that the authors of the Constitution would like. He noted that "the deliberative nature of the legislative process was the key point of its design. Through this process, the country can tap into the combined wisdom of the people's elected representatives, and not just that of a faction or an individual."
He then wisely pointed to the fact that when legislation needs to "gain broad support," it is more likely "to endure, allowing people to plan their lives in ways they can't when the rules change from day to day."
Rep. Don Bacon, Republican of Nebraska, posted the judge's comments on social media and wrote: "Perfect words." Unfortunately, few of the leaders of the Republican Party had the same reaction.
And there are two reasons. First, Trump and congressional leaders know that 60% of Americans disapprove of the president's tariff policies. And second, Trump has dominated Congress for so long that Republicans are afraid to react.
Over the past 13 months, Congress has relinquished its role as the executive branch's control apparatus. Lawmakers remained silent as the president cut billions of dollars from approved funds, renamed the Kennedy Center, established by Congress, in his honour, and abolished services he didn't like.
Not only did Congress allow Trump to illegally use emergency arrangements to impose global tariffs, but it did nothing as he spent money on things that had never been approved – such as the transfer of $10 billion from the US government to the "Peace Council" that he controls.
And Congress was absent from oversight, allowing the president to fire congressional appointees from independent committees, accept controversial gifts from foreign countries, engage in business deals with potential conflicts of interest, and decimate the federal oversight system.
The authors of the Constitution did not want Congress to be just an equal branch of the executive branch. They wanted it to be the first power, because it is closer to the people. This means that it can better reflect the values and interests of citizens.
Congress has been granting power to presidents for decades, but the Supreme Court has just given him permission to press the restart button. It is unfortunate that the court had to intervene to defend the constitutional authority that members of Congress have sworn to protect. But they must not let the opportunity go to waste. It's time to tell Trump: "Now we're taking over."
