On February 20, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court made a decision that didn’t just affect legal scholars—it shook global trade, financial markets, and businesses that depend on imports. In the case of Learning Resources Inc. v. Trump, the Court ruled against the broad use of emergency powers to impose tariffs.
For many readers, the main question is simple: Which justices voted against the tariffs—and what does this ruling actually change? The answer reveals an unusual alliance across ideological lines and a major shift in how the U.S. can apply trade duties.
Which Justices Voted Against the Tariffs
The ruling was decided 6–3, with six justices forming the majority that struck down the tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA).
Majority Justices (Against the Tariffs)
- John Roberts
- Neil Gorsuch
- Amy Coney Barrett
- Sonia Sotomayor
- Elena Kagan
- Ketanji Brown Jackson
This majority included both conservative and liberal justices, making the decision notable. The Court essentially ruled that using IEEPA for large-scale tariffs goes beyond the law’s intended purpose.
In simple terms, the justices believed that Congress—not the president alone—should control broad tariff policies, especially when they affect global trade and billions of dollars in imports.
Justices Who Supported the Tariffs
Three justices dissented, arguing that the executive branch should have wider authority during economic or national emergencies.
- Brett Kavanaugh
- Clarence Thomas
- Samuel Alito
Their view was that limiting emergency economic powers could make it harder for a president to respond quickly to global trade threats.
Also Read: Where to Buy $Trump Coin: A Complete Guide for US Buyers
Why the Court Struck Down the Tariffs
To understand the decision, you need to understand IEEPA.
The law was originally designed to allow presidents to respond to national emergencies involving foreign threats, such as sanctions or financial restrictions. However, the administration used it to impose broad tariffs across multiple countries.
The Supreme Court concluded that:
- The law was not designed for sweeping global tariffs.
- Trade policy traditionally falls under Congressional authority.
- Expanding emergency powers this far could set a risky precedent.
So the Court invalidated the tariff framework built on IEEPA.
But the story didn’t end there.
The Global Trade “Reset”
The ruling triggered what many analysts call a trade reset.
Before the decision:
- The effective U.S. tariff rate was about 16.9%.
If the IEEPA tariffs were fully removed:
- It could have dropped to around 8.3%.
However, the administration quickly shifted strategy.
Within hours, President Donald Trump invoked Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, introducing a 15% global surcharge on imports.
This created what experts describe as “tariff whack-a-mole”—where tariffs removed under one law reappear under another.
How the Tariff Ruling Affected Major U.S. Trade Partners
The ruling affected major U.S. trading partners differently.
China
For China:
- The 10% fentanyl-related tariffs were invalidated.
- Broad reciprocal tariffs were struck down.
However:
- Earlier Section 301 tariffs remain.
- The new 15% global surcharge still applies.
So while some tariffs disappeared, China still faces significant duties.
Mexico
Mexico saw a clearer benefit:
- The 25% border-security tariffs on non-USMCA goods were removed.
But:
- Some sector-specific tariffs remain, especially on steel and aluminum.
Because of the USMCA trade agreement, most Mexican exports to the U.S. remain protected.
Canada
Canada experienced a similar situation:
- The 35% tariffs on non-USMCA goods and energy were struck down.
However:
- Canada still faces duties on lumber and steel sectors.
Overall, the ruling strengthened USMCA protections.
How’s This Tariff Ruling Affected India?
For India, the decision is a mix of good news and policy uncertainty.
Earlier tariffs:
- The 18% reciprocal duty from the February interim trade deal is now invalid.
- Some Indian goods previously faced tariffs as high as 50% due to geopolitical trade tensions.
The Relief
About 55% of Indian exports affected by those high tariffs are now legally cleared.
This gives exporters—especially in textiles, chemicals, and engineering goods—some breathing room.
The Sudden Policy Shift
However, the U.S. quickly imposed the 15% global surcharge under Section 122.
That means:
- India’s effective tariff rate has reset to around 15%.
- Trade negotiations between the U.S. and India are still ongoing.
Interestingly, President Trump stated that the goal remains a larger U.S.–India trade agreement, where tariffs could eventually be reduced.
So for India, the ruling creates temporary relief but not long-term certainty.
Also Read: What Happened in Venezuela Today — And Why the World Is Paying Attention
How Stock Markets Reacted to the Tariff Ruling
Markets initially celebrated the ruling.
On the day of the decision:
- The Dow Jones and S&P 500 rose about 0.3%.
- Investors expected fewer sudden tariff shocks.
- Companies anticipated refunds potentially exceeding $160 billion.
Retail-heavy companies benefited the most:
- Walmart
- Target
- Apparel and footwear brands
These businesses depend heavily on imports, so tariff reductions directly impact their profits.
But the rally didn’t last long.
When the 15% surcharge was announced, investors realized that tariffs weren’t gone—they were just reorganized.
Commodity Markets After the Supreme Court Tariff Ruling: A Split Reaction
The Supreme Court decision in Learning Resources Inc. v. Trump didn’t create a uniform impact across markets. Instead, it produced what analysts are calling a “split reality” in commodity prices.
The reason is simple: the Court only struck down tariffs imposed under emergency powers (IEEPA). However, other trade mechanisms—like Section 232 (national security tariffs) and Section 301 (trade violation tariffs)—remain fully active. On top of that, the administration quickly introduced a 15% global surcharge under Section 122, which reshaped market expectations almost immediately.
As a result, some commodities saw relief, while others continued trading at elevated levels.
1. Industrial Metals: Prices That Refuse to Drop
For companies that rely on metals, the ruling brought little to no relief.
Steel and aluminum remain heavily protected under Section 232 tariffs, which the Court did not invalidate. In fact, several categories of imported steel and aluminum are still subject to duties reaching up to 50%. This has kept U.S. domestic prices significantly higher than international benchmarks.
Other metals like copper and nickel are also feeling pressure. The administration moved quickly to include many industrial inputs under the new 15% surcharge, preventing a sudden surge of cheaper imports from non-USMCA countries.
For manufacturers, construction firms, and infrastructure projects, this means one thing:
material costs are likely to remain high for the foreseeable future.
Many industrial buyers had hoped the ruling would trigger a temporary “tariff holiday.” Instead, the market now expects long-term price stability at elevated levels, especially compared to the London Metal Exchange (LME) averages.
2. Energy Markets: A Short Dip but Strategic Relief
Energy markets reacted differently—and briefly showed volatility.
Tariffs on Canadian energy exports, which had climbed to around 10% under IEEPA, were technically invalidated after the ruling. This caused a short-term dip in heating oil and gasoline futures, particularly on the U.S. East Coast where Canadian energy supplies play a major role.
However, the real turning point came from the administration’s response.
Under the new Section 122 surcharge, energy products were explicitly exempted. This was a strategic move designed to prevent rising fuel prices from affecting households and industries.
In effect, the policy removed what many analysts described as a temporary “energy tax” that had been influencing prices over the past several months.
For consumers and businesses alike, this exemption helps stabilize:
- Fuel prices
- Transportation costs
- Industrial energy usage
3. Agriculture: The Most Uncertain Sector
While some sectors gained clarity, agriculture entered a more uncertain phase.
Crop markets such as soybeans and corn actually weakened after the ruling. The reaction surprised many observers, but the reasoning is rooted in global trade politics.
Before the decision, tariffs imposed under emergency powers acted as a major negotiating tool with countries like China and India. Now that those tariffs are invalidated, traders fear the U.S. may have less leverage in securing large agricultural purchase agreements.
This uncertainty is why futures markets responded cautiously.
However, rural communities did receive one major benefit.
Tariffs on fertilizers, including potash and nitrogen imports, were removed when the IEEPA duties were struck down. Although the new 15% surcharge could have applied, the White House categorized fertilizers as “Essential Inputs.”
This exemption is significant because fertilizers directly affect:
- Crop production costs
- Food prices
- Farmer profitability
For many farmers, lower fertilizer costs may offset some of the uncertainty in export demand.
4. Precious Metals: Gold Gains from Political Uncertainty
Precious metals moved in the opposite direction of many industrial commodities.
Following the ruling, gold prices rose by roughly 1.2%, with silver also gaining momentum. The increase wasn’t driven by tariffs themselves but by something broader: uncertainty in economic policy direction.
Investors interpreted the legal clash between the Supreme Court and the executive branch as a sign of institutional tension over economic authority. Historically, gold performs well during periods when markets question who ultimately controls fiscal or trade policy.
In this case, gold became a safe-haven asset as investors hedged against:
- Policy instability
- Trade negotiations
- Future tariff adjustments
What Tariffs Still Apply to Commodities After the Supreme Court Ruling
The ruling didn’t simplify trade conditions—it reshaped them. Instead of a full tariff rollback, markets are now adjusting to a rebalanced system of duties and exemptions.
Here’s how commodities reacted overall:
| Commodity Group | Market Reaction | Main Reason |
|---|---|---|
| Industrial Metals | Prices remain high | Section 232 tariffs still active |
| Agricultural Crops | Slight decline | Reduced trade negotiation leverage |
| Fertilizers | Prices easing | Exempted as essential inputs |
| Energy | Stabilizing / slightly lower | Exempt from new surcharge |
| Gold | Rising | Safe-haven demand amid uncertainty |
This mixed reaction shows that the Supreme Court decision did not eliminate tariffs—it simply shifted where and how they apply.
For businesses, investors, and policymakers, the next few months will likely determine whether this becomes a temporary adjustment or the beginning of a longer-term shift in global trade strategy.
Which Goods Are Exempt From the New Tariffs
For everyday Americans, the impact is complicated.
Many expected prices to fall quickly after the ruling.
But that’s unlikely.
Economists estimate that remaining tariffs still cost the average household $400 to $800 per year.
Here’s why prices may not drop:
- Companies already passed most tariff costs to consumers.
- Refunds will go to importers, not shoppers.
- New tariffs replaced old ones.
So while businesses may recover billions, consumers may not see immediate savings.
Impact on Industries and Jobs Of U.S. Tariffs
The ruling also affects different sectors unevenly.
Industries That Benefit
Manufacturing sectors could still see:
- Domestic output increase by about 1.2%.
Tariffs still provide some protection against imports.
Industries Facing Challenges
Some industries may struggle:
- Agriculture: Down over 1% due to retaliation from trade partners.
- Construction: Down around 2.4% due to expensive materials like steel.
This shows how tariffs can help one industry while hurting another.
Also Read: Why Do People Hate Jews?Understanding the Roots of Antisemitism
Which Goods Are Exempt From the New Tariffs
Under the new surcharge system, certain goods are protected to prevent inflation and supply shortages.
These include:
- USMCA-compliant goods from Canada and Mexico
- Medical supplies and pharmaceuticals
- Critical minerals like lithium and cobalt
- Fertilizers and essential agricultural resources
These exemptions aim to protect healthcare, technology supply chains, and farming.
What Could Happen Next With U.S. Tariffs
The Supreme Court didn’t end the story—it started another process.
The case has now been sent to the Court of International Trade, which must:
- Calculate refunds for businesses
- Determine how much importers are owed
- Resolve disputes over tariff payments
Experts estimate the U.S. government may owe over $160 billion in refunds.
At the same time:
- Trade negotiations continue
- Section 122 tariffs may last 150 days
- Congress could extend or modify the policy
In other words, global trade policy is still evolving.
The Bigger Picture
The Supreme Court’s decision reshaped more than tariffs—it redefined how far presidential trade powers can go.
The justices who voted against the tariffs didn’t necessarily oppose tariffs entirely. Instead, they argued that the legal path used to impose them was incorrect.
For businesses, countries like India, and consumers, the takeaway is clear:
The tariffs may change form, but trade tensions and negotiations are far from over.