Trump Raises Global Tariffs to 15% After Supreme Court Ruling

WASHINGTON — U.S. President Donald Trump announced Saturday he is raising the planned global tariff to 15%, escalating a trade dispute following a Supreme Court ruling against his previous tariff policies. The move, revealed in a post on his social media platform, represents a further increase from the 10% levy he had announced just a day prior.

According to Trump’s statement, the decision is based on a “thorough, detailed, and complete review of the ridiculous, poorly written, and extraordinarily anti-American decision on Tariffs issued yesterday” by the U.S. Supreme Court. The announcement underscores the administration’s determination to utilize tariffs as a tool for economic and geopolitical leverage, despite legal challenges.

The Supreme Court on Friday struck down Trump’s previous attempt to impose sweeping global tariffs, finding that the president had overstepped his authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). In response, Trump signed a proclamation Friday evening invoking Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, allowing him to bypass Congress and impose the initial 10% tariff. However, this authority is limited to 150 days unless extended by legislation.

The rapid escalation – from a potential policy void to a 10% tariff, and now a 15% tariff – highlights the unpredictable nature of Trump’s trade policy. Throughout his presidency, shifting announcements regarding tariff increases and reductions have frequently unsettled markets and raised concerns among international partners.

The latest move appears to signal Trump’s intent to leverage the temporary authority granted by Section 122 to exert continued pressure. “For the next short number of months, the Trump Administration will determine and issue the new and legally permissible Tariffs, which will continue our extraordinarily successful process of Making America Great Again,” Trump wrote on Truth Social.

The 15% tariff is scheduled to take effect on February 24. The White House has not yet responded to inquiries regarding when the president will sign an updated order reflecting the increased rate.

Beyond the temporary tariffs authorized under Section 122, Trump indicated Friday that his administration is also pursuing tariffs through other sections of federal law, triggering investigations by the Department of Commerce. This suggests a broader, multi-pronged approach to imposing trade barriers.

Trump’s response to the Supreme Court’s decision has been notably personal. He launched an unusually direct attack on the justices who ruled against him, including two of his own appointees, Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett. During a press conference Friday, Trump stated he believed the two justices were “a disgrace to their families.”

He continued his criticism Friday evening, posting on social media complaints about Gorsuch, Coney Barrett, and Chief Justice John Roberts, who authored the majority opinion. On Saturday morning, Trump declared Brett Kavanaugh his “new hero,” praising his dissenting 63-page opinion and also commending Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, who also dissented. He stated of the dissenting justices: “Nobody doubts they want to MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!”

The Supreme Court’s 6-3 decision underscored the limits of presidential power in the realm of trade regulation. The case originated from a lawsuit filed by a group of small businesses and more than a dozen states with Democratic attorneys general, who argued that Trump had improperly used his authority to impose taxes.

The implementation of the 15% tariff raises questions for countries like the United Kingdom and Australia, which had previously reached agreements with the U.S. For a 10% tariff rate. The new, higher rate could necessitate renegotiations or adjustments to existing trade arrangements.

The legal basis for the new tariffs, while temporarily authorized, remains vulnerable to challenge. The 150-day window provided by Section 122 necessitates congressional action to extend the tariffs beyond that period, a prospect that could face significant opposition. The administration’s reliance on this law, rather than IEEPA, signals a shift in legal strategy but does not necessarily guarantee long-term success.

The broader implications of Trump’s tariff policy remain a subject of debate. Proponents argue that tariffs incentivize domestic production and investment, while critics contend they raise costs for consumers and businesses, disrupt supply chains, and provoke retaliatory measures from other countries. The latest escalation is likely to further fuel these debates and add to the uncertainty surrounding global trade relations.