The Trump administration is grappling with significant legal challenges to its recent policies on tariffs and birthright citizenship. In February 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that President Trump's expansive use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose tariffs was unconstitutional. This decision invalidated the "Liberation Day" tariffs imposed in April 2025, which had targeted hundreds of goods across multiple countries. Consequently, U.S. Customs is processing up to $100 billion in tariff refunds through the CAPE platform, though not all importers are automatically eligible.
Despite the ruling, many tariffs remain active under alternative legal authorities such as Section 301 (unfair trade practices), Section 338 (retaliatory measures), and Section 232 (national security), which continue to impose duties up to 50%. The administration is also seeking new ways to reinstate and expand tariffs under different frameworks. Economically, tariffs have led to increased consumer prices and inflation pressures, with businesses facing uncertainty and mixed employment outcomes. Critics from both sides of the political spectrum—including investors, lawmakers, and Trump's former vice president—have warned that the tariffs harm the U.S. economy more than they help.
In June 2026, the Supreme Court struck down President Trump's executive order aiming to end birthright citizenship for children born in the U.S. to non-citizen parents. The Court ruled that the 14th Amendment guarantees citizenship to all individuals born on U.S. soil, regardless of their parents' immigration status. The administration had 25 days to request a rehearing but missed the deadline, making the ruling final.
These legal setbacks have significant implications for the administration's policy agenda. The tariff ruling may lead to a reassessment of trade policies and potential adjustments to international relations. The birthright citizenship decision reinforces constitutional protections and may influence future immigration-related policies. Observers will be closely watching how the administration responds to these challenges and whether it will seek alternative legal avenues to achieve its policy objectives.