Here’s what smart people are saying about the Supreme Court striking down most of Trump’s tariffs

President Donald Trump issued a stinging rebuke of the Supreme Court for striking down most of his tariffs.

“Others think they’re being politically correct, which has happened before far too often with members of this court,” Trump said. “They are just being fools and lapdogs for the RINOS and radical left Democrats.”

Trump vowed to press on with his trade agenda, starting with a sweeping 10% global tariff that will be in addition to any existing tariffs. The president has other avenues to impose tariffs, including through Section 232.

While he criticized the justices who sided against him, Trump lavished praise on the three who dissented, Brett Kavanaugh, Samuel Alito, and Clarence Thomas.

“I would like to thank Justice Kavanaugh for, frankly, his genius and his great ability,” Trump said.

Wedbush’s Dan Ives said the ruling could be a “net positive” for tech companies if refunds are issued.

“With ~$133.5 billion in tariff revenue up for grabs if the US tariff ruling leads to refunds for organizations, we believe this would act as a net positive for tech with financial relief for many companies while creating greater supply chain visibility especially coming from the Asia supply chain,” Ives wrote in a note. “This will be a very noisy situation but for the tech space and AI trade it’s a net positive out of the gates in our view.”

Chief Justice John Roberts’ ruling did not explicitly address what companies that paid the now-invalidated tariffs may be entitled to.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent lamented the ruling, adding that it was “unlikely” Americans will ever see tariff refunds.

“I got a feeling the American people won’t see it,” Bessent said during a speech before the Economic Club of Dallas.

Like Trump, Bessent noted the administration has other alternatives to impose tariffs. He also echoed the president’s point that it may take years to sort out any potential refunds.

“My sense is that could be dragged out for weeks, months, years,” Bessent said about the coming court fights.

Jefferies analysts said five consumer stocks are poised to get a big boost on the heels of the ruling.

The firm’s analysts said Signet Jewelers, Yeti, Sharkninja, Nike, and Birkenstock are all set to gain do to “a meaningful margin tailwind.”

Louis Navellier, in his daily market notes report to investors, wrote that retailers, in particular, saw a “relief rally” caused by the news, but predicted “further volatility going forward as the details of how the billions in tariffs already collected will be dealt with and what Trump’s plan ‘B’ is.”

Raymond James Washington Policy Analyst Ed Mills said he expects any sort of refund process to be “lengthy and challenging.”

“We expect that the process for firms to receive tariff refunds will be lengthy and challenging, with litigants needing to bring individual cases or participate in class action (vs. automatic refunds),” Mills wrote in a note.

Mills added that Costco and other firms have sued to ensure their claims are not invalidated by the US Customs and Border Protection’s deadline for disputing tariff bills. Costco’s case remains ongoing.

Former Deputy Director of the National Economic Council Bharat Ramamurti said “rational businesses” should understand that tariffs aren’t going away.

“The point is that any rational US business is going to anticipate the possibility of new tariffs, which is going to: (a) deter them from passing along any short-term cost savings to consumers; and (b) continue to fuel the uncertainty that is putting a damper on certain forms of business investment in the US,” Ramamurti wrote in a post on Substack.

The short-term economic impact is unclear, Ramamurti wrote, because the court’s opinion did not address major issues like potential refunds.

On the topic of refunds, Erica York, the vice president of federal tax policy at the Tax Foundation, said it should actually be quite easy for the Trump administration to issue refunds.

“The IEEPA tariffs have brought in around $160 billion in tariff payments. For context, the IRS refunds taxpayers more than $300 billion in income tax overpayments each year,” York wrote on X. “Refunding tariff payments to the importer of record should follow a similar, straightforward process.”

Investor Jason Calacanis said the court’s ruling shows why Trump needs to work with Congress to impose tariffs.

“MAGA and AFAO loyalists will lose their minds when President @AOC and VP @ZohranKMamdani start using ’emergency powers’ to shape their socialist agenda,” Calacanis wrote on X. “This is why the Founding Fathers limited executive power and balanced the branches of government.”

While often supportive of Trump, Calacanis and others in the business and tech space have expressed skepticism of Trump’s sweeping tariffs.

The US Chamber of Commerce, National Retail Federation, and the National Restaurant Association hailed the court’s decision.

“Swift refunds of the impermissible tariffs will be meaningful for the more than 200,000 small business importers in this country and will help support stronger economic growth this year,” Neil Bradley, executive vice president and chief policy officer at the US Chamber of Commerce, said in a statement.

The National Retail Federation called on a lower court “to ensure a seamless process to refund the tariffs.”

“The refunds will serve as an economic boost and allow companies to reinvest in their operations, their employees and their customers,” David French, executive vice president of government relations, said in a statement.

The National Restaurant Association urged the Trump administration to “exempt food and beverage products from any new tariffs.” Tariff-related uncertainty caused significant hardship for more than 60% of restaurant operators, the trade organization said, as they faced challenges planning their menus and maintaining pricing.

“We support the president’s efforts to balance trade deficits, but the food and beverage products we depend on are not major contributors to these imbalances,” Michelle Korsmo, president and CEO of the National Restaurant Association, said in a statement.

Canadian Trade Minister Dominic LeBlanc said the decision “strengthens” his country’s view that Trump’s emergency tariffs were “unjustified.”

“Although Canada has concluded the best trade agreement with the United States among all its trading partners, we recognize that there is still much to be done to support Canadian businesses and workers who continue to be affected by the tariffs imposed under Section 232 on the steel, aluminum, and automotive sectors,” LeBlance wrote in a post on X.

Notably, Section 232 tariffs are not included in Friday’s ruling, underscoring that Trump still has additional tools at his disposal for his trade policy.

Vice President JD Vance called the decision “lawlessness from the Court.”

“Today, the Supreme Court decided that Congress, despite giving the president the ability to ‘regulate imports,’ didn’t actually mean it,” Vance wrote in a post on X. “This is lawlessness from the Court, plain and simple. And its only effect will be to make it harder for the president to protect American industries and supply chain resiliency.”

House Speaker Mike Johnson said Republicans would find a way forward after the setback.

“No one can deny that the President’s use of tariffs has brought in billions of dollars and created immense leverage for America’s trade strategy and for securing strong, reciprocal America-first trade agreements with countries that had been taking advantage of American workers for decades,” Johnson said in a statement posted on X. “Congress and the Administration will determine the best path forward in the coming weeks.”

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries took a victory lap after the ruling.

“Donald Trump’s failed economic policies and global trade war waged with irresponsible, on-again, off-again tariffs on our allies and trading partners have generated massive uncertainty, threatened the economic well-being of the American people and damaged our country’s standing around the world,” Jeffries said in a statement.

The Top House Democrat said his party will “push back aggressively in Congress” on Trump’s tariffs.

Despite being in the minority, all but one House Democrat recently joined with six Republicans to approve a largely symbolic rebuke of Trump’s emergency tariffs on Canada. It was unclear if the resolution would have passed in the Senate. Trump was widely expected to veto it if it arrived on his desk.

The Supreme Court ruled on Friday that Trump lacked the power to impose such tariffs on Canada.

Correction: February 20, 2026 — An earlier version of this story misspelled Hakeem Jeffries’ name.