Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

BumRushDaShow

(167,831 posts)
Fri Feb 20, 2026, 01:49 PM Yesterday

Trump announces new 10% global tariff after raging over Supreme Court loss

Source: CNBC

Published Fri, Feb 20 2026 1:41 PM EST Updated 18 Min Ago


President Donald Trump said Friday he will sign an executive order imposing a new 10% “global tariff,” hours after the Supreme Court struck down his sweeping “reciprocal” import duties in a major rebuke of his trade agenda.

The new tariffs will come on top of the existing levies that remain intact following the high court’s decision, Trump said as he raged at the ruling during a White House press briefing.

He will sign an executive order later Friday imposing the new duties, which are being invoked under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974. Tariffs conjured using that statute can only last for 150 days, with any extension requiring congressional approval.

Asked at the press briefing about that time limit, Trump said, “We have the right to do pretty much what we want to do.” Trump also declared that all of the tariffs currently active under statutes known as Section 232 and Section 301 will remain “in full force and effect.”

Read more: https://www.cnbc.com/2026/02/20/trump-global-trade-tariff-supreme-court.html



Article updated.

Previous article -

Published Fri, Feb 20 2026 1:41 PM EST Updated 2 Min Ago


President Donald Trump said Friday he will sign an executive order imposing a new 10% "global tariff," hours after the Supreme Court struck down his sweeping "reciprocal" import duties in a major rebuke of his trade agenda.

The new tariffs will come on top of the existing levies that remain intact following the high court's decision, Trump said as he raged at the ruling during a White House press briefing.

He will sign an executive order later Friday imposing the new duties, which are being invoked under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974.

Tariffs conjured using that statute can only last for 150 days, with any extension requiring congressional approval. Asked at the press briefing about that time limit, Trump said, "We have the right to do pretty much what we want to do."


This is breaking news. Please refresh for updates.



Original article -

Published Fri, Feb 20 2026 1:41 PM EST Updated 3 Min Ago


President Donald Trump said Friday he will sign an executive order imposing a new 10% "global tariff," hours after the Supreme Court struck down his sweeping "reciprocal" import duties in a major rebuke of his trade agenda.


This is breaking news. Please refresh for updates.
34 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Trump announces new 10% global tariff after raging over Supreme Court loss (Original Post) BumRushDaShow Yesterday OP
Um... how does that work? The executive branch will have to pay 10% more for supplies it gets via imports? ck4829 Yesterday #1
Really? UpInArms Yesterday #2
thats something he legally can do moonshinegnomie Yesterday #3
He's gone insane, remove Blues Heron Yesterday #4
Flush... MarcoZandrini Yesterday #18
Thank you for your attention to this fecal matter! Blues Heron Yesterday #22
Yup. Well said! Mr. Evil Yesterday #29
"We have the right to do pretty much what we want to do." Wednesdays Yesterday #5
Ali Baba and his 40 thieves Justice matters. Yesterday #19
Ooooh... BadgerKid Yesterday #6
And there it is Miguelito Loveless Yesterday #7
I'd say it's a solid F U SCOTUS. flashman13 Yesterday #21
Of course popsdenver Yesterday #32
Translation: Ray Bruns Yesterday #8
The most basic question: what we tariffs supposed to accomplish? Bluetus Yesterday #31
He's such a spoiled child sakabatou Yesterday #9
And we're paying for his tantrums. StarryNite Yesterday #14
Legal basis? We don't need no stinking legal basis!! moniss Yesterday #10
I read your words, and you laid out a perfect picture of bluestarone Yesterday #12
We have the right to do what we want to do. choie Yesterday #11
"We" being "me, myself and I" in the fat asses case! KPN Yesterday #17
Will the spineless republican shitbirds in congress and the senate FINALLY do something? NoMoreRepugs Yesterday #13
They'll kneel down and pucker up some more durablend Yesterday #15
Why doesn't he just fucking die? Orrex Yesterday #16
CBS showed the babbling fool. Olympics on NBC. Watch people go downhill one at a time rather than the twodogsbarking Yesterday #20
He's just declared himself king. Next up: God. Grokenstein Yesterday #23
With no policing entity willing to step up, why would he heed the court's admonition? Magoo48 Yesterday #24
Does his new tariff include Penguin Island? Hassler Yesterday #25
Hasn't anyone figured how to make them a tax deduction? /nt bucolic_frolic Yesterday #26
So now we've reached the point where he is Figarosmom Yesterday #27
149 days left of this BS also........he does any and everything to circumvent the rule of law and the adjoining turbinetree Yesterday #28
The legal ground to use this act to impose such broad tariffs like this, is D. Spaulding Yesterday #30
Thank you for this rational, informative reply. KY_EnviroGuy 23 hrs ago #33
Why Trump's Section 122 Tariffs Are Illegal LetMyPeopleVote 7 hrs ago #34

ck4829

(37,554 posts)
1. Um... how does that work? The executive branch will have to pay 10% more for supplies it gets via imports?
Fri Feb 20, 2026, 01:53 PM
Yesterday

moonshinegnomie

(3,957 posts)
3. thats something he legally can do
Fri Feb 20, 2026, 01:53 PM
Yesterday

he also said he starting an investigation of countries for unfair trade practices to reimpose tarrifs but that will take time...

Wednesdays

(22,122 posts)
5. "We have the right to do pretty much what we want to do."
Fri Feb 20, 2026, 02:01 PM
Yesterday

Pretty much sums up the attitude of the entire regime.

Justice matters.

(9,602 posts)
19. Ali Baba and his 40 thieves
Fri Feb 20, 2026, 03:56 PM
Yesterday

too... doesn't mean they've gotten away with it once their hide was raided.

Miguelito Loveless

(5,598 posts)
7. And there it is
Fri Feb 20, 2026, 02:22 PM
Yesterday

The Child Rapist has told his bought and paid for minions on the SCOTUS that he will ignore them.

I expect Roberts and Gorsuch to find themselves being investigated for mortgage fraud soon.

So, we are now officially a police state.

popsdenver

(2,010 posts)
32. Of course
Fri Feb 20, 2026, 07:56 PM
Yesterday

the groups responsible for enforcement of ANY Supreme Court ruling is...........

THE DEPT OF JUSTICE, AND THE FBI...........

Truly, the ONLY way to stop him, is up to the House to vote to impeach him, AND the Senate to vote him guilty. Period

Bluetus

(2,568 posts)
31. The most basic question: what we tariffs supposed to accomplish?
Fri Feb 20, 2026, 06:12 PM
Yesterday

Ostensibly Trump was going to use them to force manufacturing jobs to come back to the USA.

We know what actually happened. Trump used these as extortion to get special deals to enrich himself. How many times did Trump announce huge tariffs on a single country or region, then quietly drop them a week or two later? You can be certain that nearly every such instance corresponded with a donation to the inaugural fund, the ballroom fund, the Trump golden shoes fund, the Trump crypto coin fund, a Trump PAC or whatever. It was all about extortion, that is obvious.

But the question is what good an across-the-board tariff of 10% accomplishes. It doesn't provide any real incentive for anybody to do anything. Nobody is going to relocate a major manufacturing operation for 10%. And if he is applying it equally to all countries, then that limits the extortion leverage.

Bottom line, this looks like simply a face saving ploy. It doesn't matter. Our jobs now is to force Trump to refund all those tariffs to individuals

moniss

(8,891 posts)
10. Legal basis? We don't need no stinking legal basis!!
Fri Feb 20, 2026, 02:37 PM
Yesterday

But realistically when he says all of his tariffs remain intact it basically is flipping the middle finger to the SC ruling. So now what? Obviously this reaction to an adverse SC ruling is a forewarning of how he will react to any other adverse ruling. An out of control POTUS going around the world freely extorting for his own gain and using the US military to secure oil revenue for his slush fund. Along with an out of control DHS, Intelligence and DOJ to go after any critics and to beat and kill protesters in the street.

Even if states pass laws banning ICE-American Gestapo at the polls what happens when he ignores those laws? Local PD isn't going to get into a shootout with the Feds so now what? He has clearly demonstrated, as have the DOJ flunkies, that non-compliance/slow rolling etc. is their SOP with respect to any rulings they don't like. Hundreds of times of clearly violating court orders to not deport a specific person and then they do it anyway. Nobody in jail for contempt, judges issuing words of condemnation and little more and once again I harken back to the warnings I and many others gave back in the Spring of 2025 when we warned those who felt "the courts" would prevent things from getting out of hand.

Here once again today we see that court decisions are words on paper without any enforcement mechanism other than more words. The fascists aren't planning on allowing words to stop them. They also aren't planning on abiding by election results.

bluestarone

(21,814 posts)
12. I read your words, and you laid out a perfect picture of
Fri Feb 20, 2026, 02:46 PM
Yesterday

OUR country today! Your, "now what" is exactly what i've been screaming about as well. Be ready for ICE, or other ways this election will fail. God, i hope i'm wrong, because our freedoms should no longer be taken for granted. The shame i have is our forefathers died for all of us. Here we are at that same cross roads and what will OUR decision be?

KPN

(17,259 posts)
17. "We" being "me, myself and I" in the fat asses case!
Fri Feb 20, 2026, 03:36 PM
Yesterday

Chief Roberts might actually be okay with that. He probably even has a deal already that he couldn’t refuse.

twodogsbarking

(18,194 posts)
20. CBS showed the babbling fool. Olympics on NBC. Watch people go downhill one at a time rather than the
Fri Feb 20, 2026, 03:59 PM
Yesterday

entire country going downhill. How long is this hill anyway. I can''t see the bottom or the top.

turbinetree

(27,325 posts)
28. 149 days left of this BS also........he does any and everything to circumvent the rule of law and the adjoining
Fri Feb 20, 2026, 04:47 PM
Yesterday

legislation.............

D. Spaulding

(484 posts)
30. The legal ground to use this act to impose such broad tariffs like this, is
Fri Feb 20, 2026, 05:11 PM
Yesterday

even shakier than his first excuse. We need some entity to file court challenges ASAP since 122 was never designed for this;

"Section 122 Purpose: It is intended to combat a "fundamental international payments problem" (e.g., a severe balance-of-payments deficit), rather than just a general trade deficit.

Limitations: Tariffs are capped at 15% and are restricted to a 150-day duration unless approved by Congress.

Legal Challenges: Experts argue that using this section for sweeping, universal tariffs would face significant legal challenges because it is intended to correct currency-related payments issues rather than protect specific domestic industries."

LetMyPeopleVote

(177,634 posts)
34. Why Trump's Section 122 Tariffs Are Illegal
Sat Feb 21, 2026, 02:41 PM
7 hrs ago

trump's new replacement tariffs are illegal. These tariffs can only be used when there is a balance-of-payments deficit which is very different from a balance of trade deficit. Since the US is no longer on a currency fixed exchange rate there have not been any balance of payment deficits for a couple of decades. These tariffs will be challenged and trump will lose again

Fascinating National Review post on Trump's latest Tariff gambit. Archive link here (it's pay walled, please don't give them money lol)

archive.is/r4Xdf

Rude Law Dog (@esghound.com) 2026-02-21T19:01:57.437Z

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/trumps-section-122-tariffs-are-illegal/

In Section 122, Congress endowed the president with narrow, temporary authority to impose tariffs “to deal with large and serious United States balance-of-payments deficits” (emphasis added). What Trump is complaining about — something he insists is a crisis but is not — is the balance of trade, not of payments. The United States does not have an overall balance of payments deficit, much less a large and serious one.

A trade deficit between the U.S. and a foreign nation occurs, mainly in connection with goods (which is just one aspect of international commerce), when imports are greater than exports. This is not really a problem for a variety of reasons — e.g., a trade deficit results in an investment surplus, the U.S. is a major services economy and often runs exported services surpluses that mitigate the imports deficit in goods, etc.

The balance of payments is a broader concept than the balance of trade. It accounts for all the economic transactions that take place between the United States and the rest of the world. Even without getting into every kind of transaction that entails, suffice it to say that foreign investment in the United States, coupled with the advantages our nation accrues because the dollar is the world’s reserve currency, more than make up for the longstanding trade deficit in goods.

Our overall payments are in balance. There is no crisis.

It’s vital to understand why Section 122 was enacted. There was a financial crisis in the late 60s and early 70s under the Bretton Woods system, when the dollar was tied to gold. Foreign countries that held dollar reserves could exchange them for gold at a fixed rate. Meanwhile, our government was spending at a high clip due to the Vietnam War and Great Society programs. This and the obligation to pay out gold put enormous pressure on the dollar. In response, in 1971, President Nixon severed the dollar’s tie to gold and — as several justices recounted in Friday’s Learning Resources opinions — imposed a temporary 10 percent import surcharge (a tariff) to stabilize the economy......

There is no rationale under Section 122 to impose tariffs. Because President Trump has no unilateral authority to order tariffs, he must meet the preconditions of Section 122 to justify levying them. He cannot. Not even close.
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Trump announces new 10% g...