US Supreme Court Says Next Friday Will Be a Decision Day
•February 13, 2026
0
Why It Matters
A Supreme Court decision on tariffs could reshape U.S. trade policy and influence monetary policy, directly affecting corporate earnings and market sentiment.
Key Takeaways
- •Supreme Court set three decision days in February
- •Tariff case may be among cases heard
- •Major Questions Doctrine could limit presidential tariff authority
- •Lower tariffs could enable further Fed rate cuts
- •House and Senate voted against tariffs, Trump likely to veto
Pulse Analysis
The Supreme Court’s scheduling of three decision days in February signals an imminent legal resolution on a high‑stakes trade dispute. While the Court traditionally keeps its docket confidential, the timing aligns with recent congressional moves to block new tariffs, suggesting the tariff case could be among the opinions slated for release. This procedural cue has already prompted traders to brace for volatility, as markets typically react sharply to Supreme Court rulings that affect fiscal policy.
At the heart of the legal battle is the Major Questions Doctrine, a judicial principle that requires clear congressional authorization for agencies to act on issues of substantial economic and political weight. Critics argue that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) does not grant the president unfettered power to impose tariffs without explicit legislative language. Justices Barrett and Sotomayor highlighted the doctrine’s relevance, questioning whether any statutory provision authorizes the executive to “regulate importation” as a tax mechanism. A ruling applying the doctrine could sharply limit the administration’s ability to reinstate or expand tariffs.
Should the Court strike down the tariff authority, the immediate effect would be a reduction in trade barriers, bolstering corporate profit margins and easing supply‑chain pressures. Moreover, lower tariffs would reinforce the Federal Reserve’s case for further rate cuts, providing a dual stimulus to the economy. Investors and policymakers alike are watching closely, as the decision could set a precedent for future regulatory battles and reshape the landscape of U.S. trade and monetary policy.
US Supreme Court says next Friday will be a decision day
The US House voted against tariffs this week and the Senate is expected to follow suit. They will surely be vetoed by President Trump but that move gives some cover to the Supreme Court ahead of its big decision on tariffs.
The court today announced that Feb 20, 24 and 25 will all be 'decision days' or days when they will render opinions. As a reminder, they don't pre-announce which cases they will be ruling on, so it could be tariffs and it could be one of the other dozens of cases before the court.
Officials have until June to make a decision but given the gravity of the tariffs, it's expected to come sooner. The decisions are rendered at 10 am ET or just afterwards so on those three days we will be standing by and markets will be holding their breath.
Previously, administration officials have signaled they could easily reconstitute tariffs but more recently, they toned down that rhetoric, highlighting that it could be difficult. That's a rare change of rhetoric and indicates the court decision could actually lower tariffs. If that's the case, it would clear the way for further Fed rate cuts and provide a double dose of good news for US companies.
The Major Questions Doctrine
Critical in the decision will be the reasoning of the court, particularly if that extends to some of the other measures the White House is considering. One of the avenues the court could go is the "major questions doctrine", something conservative justices pushed for in the Biden administration.
Under the doctrine, the Supreme Court has rejected agency claims of regulatory authority when the underlying claim of authority concerns an issue of "vast economic and political significance" and Congress has not clearly empowered the agency with authority over the issue
Challengers say this is a textbook major questions case. IEEPA shouldn't be read to give the president this power precisely because it would have such vast economic and political significance — and under the major questions doctrine, if Congress wants to give the president sweeping authority over matters of major economic and political significance, it has to say so clearly.
Justice Barrett asked a pointed question: whether the government could identify any other place in the US Code where the phrase "regulate importation" had been used to confer tariff-imposing authority. The Solicitor General struggled to answer.
When the government argued the major questions doctrine doesn't apply to foreign affairs, Justice Sotomayor shot back: "We have never applied it to foreign affairs, but this is a tariff. This is a tax."
That kind of reasoning might apply to any attempts to reconstitute tariffs if it's the reason tariffs are struck down.
This article was written by Adam Button at investinglive.com.
0
Comments
Want to join the conversation?
Loading comments...