A defiant Trump vows new tariffs while fuming at Supreme Court

By Adam Cancryn, CNN

(CNN) — President Donald Trump’s months of preparation for a Supreme Court ruling on his sweeping tariff powers did little to contain his rage when the verdict finally came.

“I’m ashamed of certain members of the court, absolutely ashamed for not having the courage to do what’s right for the country,” he fumed from the White House briefing room on Friday in a hastily organized 45-minute appearance.

“Other alternatives will now be used to replace the ones the that the court incorrectly rejected.”

Trump swung between indignation over the elimination of his broad emergency tariffs and insistence that his ambitions for his favored economic tool would not be derailed, claiming at one point the US would emerge “stronger for it” even as he confessed to being “deeply disappointed.”

The White House now plans to impose a new 10% across-the-board tariff for as long as five months — unless extended by Congress — under a separate legal authority, buying Trump time to draw up a new gameplan for waging the trade war that has animated his agenda both at home and abroad.

“It’s a little more complicated, the process takes a little more time,” he said. “But the end result is going to get us more money.”

But that message belied the political repercussions for the White House, where aides were in the midst of preparations for a State of the Union speech next week meant to tout the nation’s progress ahead of the looming midterm elections.

Trump was in the State Dining Room at a breakfast meeting with governors when he received a note informing him of the ruling, which he blasted as “a disgrace” before ending the event early, according to people familiar with his remarks. Within hours, he had arranged to address the public, returning to the briefing room for the first time in a month.

Fresh questions about Trump’s agenda

The president’s defiance in the face of stark legal rejection marked the start of a new era of financial uncertainty for companies and consumers already thrown off-kilter by his determination to impose tariffs at unprecedented scale.

Trump’s aggressive use of emergency trade authorities reshaped international supply chains and global alliances, often in a matter of minutes, and allowed him to wield the threat of hefty tariffs as leverage to pressure foreign leaders into fulfilling his demands.

That now threatens to unravel, with little clarity about what comes next.

The Supreme Court did not offer directions for how the government should pay back the billions of dollars in refunds collected from companies that are now racing to seek restitution, creating an economic scenario that Trump aides and trade experts alike have succinctly described as “a mess.”

Trump on Friday declined to commit to paying back the money, which he had previously suggested could be used to fund a variety of new initiatives, including sending Americans $2,000 “tariff dividends.” The president instead suggested the matter would get tied up in years of legal fights.

The ruling also threw into doubt the central plank of Trump’s approach to foreign policy, raising fresh questions about whether allies and adversaries alike will suddenly feel more emboldened to challenge the United States on the world stage.

“It’s a huge blow to the president, and it does take away a major foreign policy tool,” said Michael Strain, director of economic policy studies at the right-leaning American Enterprise Institute. “This is a very decisive statement by the Supreme Court that, on the issue of trade policy, the administration clearly and dramatically exceeded its authority.”

Trump had described the stakes more starkly in the lead-up to the court’s verdict, saying the survival of his tariff regime at one point was a matter of “LIFE OR DEATH” and warning that its invalidation “would literally destroy” the country. He has frequently credited the threat of tariffs for compelling new investment in the US and improving American competitiveness, despite pushback from economic experts on both sides of the aisle who argue the chief consequence of tariffs is higher prices for Americans.

“Without tariffs, this country would be in such trouble right now,” he said Thursday during a speech at a Georgia steel plant. “It’s a shame that I have to justify this, because it’s just common sense.”

On Friday, Trump struck a somewhat different tone, seeking to downplay the size of the setback. He claimed the alternative levers his administration planned to use for tariffs would be more formidable and possibly even result in higher levies on foreign goods and materials around the globe.

“I’m going to go in a different direction, probably the direction that I should’ve gone the first time,” Trump said. “In fact, I can charge much more than I was charging.”

In reality, though, the political import of the court decision immediately reverberated through the White House, where Trump has long maintained that the wide-ranging tariff powers are key to his economic and foreign policy success.

Vice President JD Vance and several Cabinet officials also criticized the ruling and the Supreme Court itself, despite the high court’s clear conservative majority and the fact Trump picked two of the justices who voted against his tariffs authority.

“This is lawlessness from the Court, plain and simple,” Vance wrote on X. “And its only effect will be to make it harder for the president to protect American industries and supply chain resiliency.”

Alternative tariff options

Inside the administration, officials had spent months gaming out potential outcomes and planning the fallback options that Trump is now expected to utilize. The 10% global tariff announced Friday will be carried out through a pathway that allows the administration to set duties that don’t exceed 15% for up to 150 days.

Other existing authorities that officials are likely to invoke would allow Trump to reconstruct many of the tariffs that were just struck down — but at a far slower pace requiring more procedure than the single stroke of a pen.

“They’re not going away,” said Everett Eissenstat, a former Trump trade official. “But the biggest impact is the inability to use rapid tariffs to drive geopolitical and foreign policy issues.”

At one point, officials had considered a more aggressive maneuver that would rely on charging “licensing” fees instead of tariffs, preserving Trump’s ability to impose them at will, people familiar with the discussions said. But though the president acknowledged Friday he was “thinking about using it,” the approach is viewed as highly risky and likely to result in yet another legal challenge.

One option that Trump and his aides made clear Friday is not on the table: Retreating from their trade war altogether, despite constant warnings from economists and even GOP allies that the tariffs have pushed up prices and worsened the affordability crisis weighing on the party ahead of the midterms.

Trump instead indicated he’s only planning to double down on his approach ahead of his national address on Tuesday that will serve as his highest-profile opportunity yet to sell skeptical Americans on his economic plan.

As for the six Supreme Court justices who ruled against him and will likely be in the front row for that speech, “they’re barely invited,” Trump said. “Honestly, I couldn’t care less if they come.”

The-CNN-Wire
™ & © 2026 Cable News Network, Inc., a Warner Bros. Discovery Company. All rights reserved.

CNN’s Kaitlan Collins, Kristen Holmes, Kevin Liptak and Sarah Ferris contributed to this report.