Just hours after the US Supreme Court struck down his global tariff regime, President Donald Trump did what markets have come to expect and went bigger.
On February 21, Washington lifted its unilateral global tariff to 15 percent, up from the 10 percent level announced a day earlier.
The escalation followed the court’s ruling that tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act were unconstitutional, a decision that had briefly steadied equities, bonds and currencies after weeks of volatility.
Trump’s response, delivered on X, cast the shift not as a retreat but as recalibration. The 15 percent rate, he wrote, sits at a “fully allowed, and legally tested” threshold.
The Trump administration appears to be pivoting away from emergency executive powers toward alternative statutory authorities, wagering that a narrower and more technical foundation can survive judicial scrutiny.
For investors, the implications are immediate. The court’s decision had raised hopes that trade tensions might ease. Instead, the White House signaled it will reconstruct its tariff architecture using mechanisms designed to pass constitutional muster.
The episode highlights a familiar pattern. When confronted with legal setbacks, Trump has often sought procedural workarounds, leaning on different laws, regulatory reinterpretations or administrative sequencing to reach similar policy outcomes.
The economic stakes are substantial. A 15 percent across the board tariff would ripple through global supply chains, lift input costs and invite retaliation from major trading partners.
The move also reinforces Trump’s economic nationalist platform and his argument that aggressive trade measures are central to restoring American leverage.
Markets looking for stability are instead confronting renewed uncertainty, this time anchored in a high stakes test of executive authority.
