Advertisement
The timing of the court’s decision has been the subject of much speculation and anticipation. But now it may not land for at least several more weeks.
President Trump has imposed sweeping tariffs on imports from nearly every U.S. trading partner.Credit...Ruth Fremson/The New York Times
Jan. 21, 2026, 12:25 p.m. ET
As the justices weigh how much flexibility President Trump has to oust members of the powerful Federal Reserve, the court has yet to issue a highly anticipated ruling on the legality of the president’s other potentially major economy-shaking initiative.
The Supreme Court announced decisions in three cases on Tuesday but it did not issue a ruling on Mr. Trump’s novel use of an emergency statute from the 1970s to set…
Advertisement
The timing of the court’s decision has been the subject of much speculation and anticipation. But now it may not land for at least several more weeks.
President Trump has imposed sweeping tariffs on imports from nearly every U.S. trading partner.Credit...Ruth Fremson/The New York Times
Jan. 21, 2026, 12:25 p.m. ET
As the justices weigh how much flexibility President Trump has to oust members of the powerful Federal Reserve, the court has yet to issue a highly anticipated ruling on the legality of the president’s other potentially major economy-shaking initiative.
The Supreme Court announced decisions in three cases on Tuesday but it did not issue a ruling on Mr. Trump’s novel use of an emergency statute from the 1970s to set sweeping tariffs on imports from nearly every U.S. trading partner.
It was the third time this month that the justices took the bench and announced opinions in cases they have heard since October — without releasing any information about the tariff case.
The timing of the court’s decision has been the subject of much speculation and anticipation. But now it may not land for at least several more weeks.
The court has yet to set a date for its next opinion announcements, but barring some change, the next possibility is one month from now on Friday, Feb. 20. That’s the first day the justices are scheduled to be back on the bench before another round of oral arguments.
In advance of the arguments in the tariffs case in November, Mr. Trump had urged the justices to quickly resolve the matter. D. John Sauer, the solicitor general, warned the court about economic uncertainty and instability, and said the emergency power was a critical tool in trade negotiations.
By not ruling on the tariffs at an extraordinary clip, the justices on the one hand have denied the administration the quick-turn decision it requested. But on the other hand, they have left the tariffs in place in the meantime.
Since the November hearing at the court, Mr. Trump has repeatedly used trade policy as a way to try to achieve his broader foreign policy goals. On Saturday, he demanded a deal to buy Greenland, warning that he would otherwise impose 10 percent tariffs on a group of European countries and that the tariffs could later rise to 25 percent.
On Monday, the president threatened to impose 200 percent tariffs on French wine, including Champagne, if President Emmanuel Macron of France were to decline to join his proposed “Board of Peace” for Gaza.
Ann Marimow covers the Supreme Court for The Times from Washington.
Advertisement