U.S. Trade Rep Greer says tariff policy 'hasn't changed' despite SCOTUS ruling

[BumRushDaShow]

Source: ABC News

February 22, 2026, 11:20 AM


U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer outlined Sunday how the Trump administration's tariff policy will continue, despite Friday's Supreme Court ruling blocking most of the president's signature economic policy.

"The legal tool to implement it, that might change, but the policy hasn't changed," Greer told ABC News' "This Week" co-anchor Martha Raddatz. "And so, we're aiming for continuity. There's a 15% tariff now. It's roughly equivalent to the types of tariffs that we had in place under IEEPA."

The Supreme Court ruling specifically blocked President Donald Trump's implementation of tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), which accounted for 70% of all tariffs the administration had imposed globally. In the 6-3 opinion, the Supreme Court said the emergency law, which does not mention tariffs or duties, did not give the president the authority to impose import taxes. While there are other laws the executive branch can use to impose tariffs, those options are more limited or cumbersome to implement than the sweeping authority the president argued he had under IEEPA.

While acknowledging the president is more constrained now, Greer insisted the White House still has "durable tools" to do tariffs.

Read more: https://abcnews.com/Politics/us-trade-rep-greer-tariff-policy-hasnt-changed/story?id=130382808

[louis-t]

1. The "durable tools" that include breaking the law.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

4. Not the sharpest tools in spite of big Donny's claim

[BaronChocula]

2. Poor big corporations

They poured money into the tax cut candidate and now they have uncertainty which they also hate. At least under a normal president they get taxes which should be certain (like death).

[bluestarone]

3. Well, seems like only one think will stop him

A natural death!! Just hope it's the most painful one!!

[mdbl]

5. Are we surprised the Dump Administration will disregard the law?

Of course not. Are we surprised the entire GOP has turned into a bunch of lawbreakers? I am almost to the point of no.

[Figarosmom]

6. Maybe the Supremes should put their foot

Down and hold those not doing as told in contempt.

[Ol Janx Spirit]

7. Well that's part of the problem isn't it? The Supreme Court has no way to enforce...

...a ruling in reality. The enforcement power really lies with the executive branch, and there's no way they are going to lock anyone in the executive branch up for disobeying an order they don't agree with.

Beyond that it really gets complicated, but in short the executive branch controls everyone that could really participate in enforcement:
https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/LSB11271#:~:text=The%20boundaries%20between%20civil%20and,are%20legally%20or%20factually%20unfounded.

Congress could step in and defund the government or certain parts of it to force compliance, but that's going to be difficult politically--and possibly in reality if the executive branch which controls the Treasury Department which handles all the money taken in by the government and distributed to government agencies decide they just aren't going to stop the flow of money.

What we really have is an executive branch with all of the real power having been delegated to it while the Congress and Judicial branches really just exist in our collective imaginations. As long as those with actual power go along with what they say--which has happened from 1789 until now--then the myth holds.

Why the Founders did not realize from the myriad examples that ancient Rome gave us that whomever has the power to tax citizens and control an army really holds all the power in a society is a mystery--but here we are.