The GOP’s Last Chance to Shed the Tariff Albatross

Once again, Jason is spot on.

The GOP’s Last Chance to Shed the Tariff Albatross

Import duties are driving up prices, voters worry about affordability, and November is approaching.

By Jason L. Riley, WSJ

Feb. 24, 2026 4:52 pm ET

The Supreme Court’s decision striking down President Trump’s sweeping taxes on imports was the best thing that could have happened to Republicans in an election year when they will need all the help they can get. How long will it take the GOP to realize that?

The court ruled 6-3 that Mr. Trump overstepped his authority by using emergency powers to bypass Congress and impose tariffs on China, Canada and Mexico to address trade imbalances and stop drug smuggling. Like previous high court decisions that blocked the Biden administration’s student-loan forgiveness and eviction moratorium, the ruling strikes a blow for the constitutional separation of powers. It also provides cover to Republicans who want a course correction on tariff policy between now and November.

The president remains unpersuaded, alas. His combative response to the decision showcased a deep misunderstanding of the Supreme Court’s role in our representative democracy. Mr. Trump’s lack of decorum, which by now is expected, was on full bipartisan display Friday. Those who disagree with the president, he made clear, aren’t merely wrong but despicable human beings with deep character flaws. He described the Republican-appointed justices who ruled against him as “fools” and “lap dogs” who lack “the courage to do what’s right for our country,” while Democrat-appointed justices are “against anything that makes America strong, healthy and great again.”

Mr. Trump accused conservatives on the court of being slaves to political correctness, which is an odd criticism to throw at justices who voted to overturn Roe v. Wade and ban racial preferences in college admissions. He called the court’s liberals “a disgrace to our nation,” then added by way of praise: “But you can’t knock their loyalty”—meaning to the party—which is “one thing you can do with some of our people.” Does Mr. Trump think that members of the Supreme Court have a duty of partisan loyalty? When the court ruled 8-0 in U.S. v. Nixon (1974) that executive privilege isn’t limitless, three of those justices had been appointed by President Nixon.

As bad was Mr. Trump’s condescension toward Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Brett Kavanaugh, who dissented. “I’d like to thank and congratulate Justices Thomas, Alito and Kavanaugh for their strength and wisdom and love of our country.” Congratulate? Justice Kavanaugh’s “stock has gone way up, you have to see, I’m so proud of him.” Does the president think the justices want or need a pat on the head from him?

Members of the court are nominated by the president but don’t serve at his pleasure, unlike the members of his cabinet, who can be hired, fired and replaced at will. Nor do they serve a ceremonial role or exist to do the executive branch’s bidding. Rather, the court is an independent, coequal branch of government tasked with determining whether the government’s actions—including the president’s—are constitutional and lawful. In recent years, it has usually been Democrats who were guilty of lashing out at the court to undermine its legitimacy. Sadly, Mr. Trump’s response to Friday’s ruling is more of the same.

The reality, whether or not the president accepts it, is that tariffs have been disruptive to the economy and are deeply unpopular. They haven’t reduced the trade deficit or boosted factory employment, as Mr. Trump claims they have. American consumers have grown accustomed to more options at lower prices for autos, clothing, electronics, food and countless other goods thanks to free trade across international borders. Higher levies on imports lead to higher costs and fewer choices.

The president insists that tariffs ultimately are paid by foreigners and are necessary to “protect our companies,” but a recent study by the New York Federal Reserve concluded what many other studies have shown—that nearly all the economic burden from the Trump tariffs has fallen on U.S. firms and consumers.

That is no surprise to anyone familiar with classical economic writings on trade going back more than two centuries. But even people who have never read a word of Adam Smith, David Ricardo or John Stuart Mill can read an electricity bill or a grocery-store receipt. Mr. Trump is less bothered by higher retail prices because he thinks they are necessary to rebalance a global economy in which the U.S. supposedly has been “ripped off” for “many decades,” even as it somehow became the most prosperous nation in human history.

Voters punished Democrats in 2024 over inflation, but Democrats have since won elections by campaigning on cost-of-living concerns. Mr. Trump wants to double down on tariffs, but that means doubling down on tax increases at a time when consumers are most worried about affordability. The president would have Republicans ignore polls on the economy, stay the course on his trade policies, and hope for the best in the fall as he tries to make mercantilism great again. It’s a fool’s errand.