作者： root

The Supreme Court on Friday blocked President Donald Trump’s use of an emergency law to unilaterally impose sweeping tariffs on most U.S. trading partners, delivering a blow to the president in a case centered on one of his signature economic policies — one he characterized as “life or death” for the U.S. economy.

In a 6-3 decision, the justices invalidated Trump’s tariffs. Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Brett Kavanaugh dissented.

“The Framers gave that power to ‘Congress alone’ — notwithstanding the obvious foreign affairs implications of tariffs,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the majority. “And whatever may be said of other powers that implicate foreign affairs, we would not expect Congress to relinquish its tariff power through vague language, or without careful limits.”

Roberts noted that Trump used “two words” that were “separated by 16 others” in the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), “regulate” and “importation,” to justify that he had the “independent power to impose tariffs on imports from any country, of any product, at any rate, for any amount of time.”

“Those words cannot bear such weight,” Roberts wrote.

BATTLEGROND STATES SHOULDER BURDEN OF TRUMP’S TARIFFS AS MIDTERM MESSAGING RAMPS UP

The Supreme Court heard oral arguments in November in the case, which centered on Trump’s use of the IEEPA to enact his “Liberation Day” tariffs on most countries, including a 10% global tariff and a set of higher, so-called “reciprocal” tariffs on certain nations.

In April, Trump declared the U.S. trade deficit a “national emergency,” and lawyers for the administration have cited that declaration as the legal basis for invoking IEEPA, which allows the president to respond to “unusual and extraordinary threats” when a national emergency has been declared.

The high court agreed to take up the case last fall after lower courts, including the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT) and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, blocked Trump’s attempt to use IEEPA to enact import duties.

Lower courts pressed the Justice Department to explain why Trump invoked IEEPA when other, more narrowly tailored statutes enacted by Congress more specifically address tariffs — including laws that cap tariffs at certain levels or set timeframes subject to congressional review.

The law authorizes the president to “regulate … importation” during a declared national emergency, but it does not mention the word “tariffs” — an omission that was at the heart of the hours-long arguments before the high court in November. The absence of the word was a key factor in the majority’s decision.

During oral arguments, justices pressed Solicitor General John Sauer, who argued on behalf of the government, on whether IEEPA applies to tariffs or taxation powers and what guardrails — if any — would limit the executive branch should the high court rule in Trump’s favor.

TRUMP DENOUNCES COURT’S ‘POLITICAL’ TARIFF DECISION, CALLS ON SUPREME COURT TO ACT QUICKLY

Sauer told the justices that IEEPA allows a president to “regulate” “importation” of goods, which he said was the practical equivalent of a tariff.

But justices, including Trump’s conservative appointees, appeared skeptical, pressing Sauer on whether there has “ever been another instance in which a statute has used that language to confer the power” Trump seeks.

Other conservative justices questioned whether an “economic equivalent” to tariffs — such as sanctions, embargoes, licenses and quotas — could be used by the president under the law.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh raised in a fiery dissent what he said would be “serious practical consequences” of the high court’s decision in terms of refunding illegitimately imposed tariffs. The majority did not address refunds, an issue now likely to be raised in lower courts.

“The United States may be required to refund billions of dollars to importers who paid the IEEPA tariffs, even though some importers may have already passed on costs to consumers or others,” Kavanaugh wrote. “As was acknowledged at oral argument, the refund process is likely to be a ‘mess.’”

Lawyers for the Trump administration have argued in lower courts that the IEEPA allows a president to act in response to “unusual and extraordinary threats” and in cases where a national emergency has been declared.

TRUMP TARIFF PLAN FACES UNCERTAIN FUTURE AS COURT BATTLES INTENSIFY

Trump has claimed that deep and “sustained” trade deficits amount to a national emergency that is sufficient to trigger his executive powers under the emergency law.

The DOJ urged the Supreme Court to allow the tariffs to remain in place, warning that denying Trump the tariff authority under IEEPA “would expose our nation to trade retaliation without effective defenses.”

Plaintiffs countered that in the 50 years since its passage, the law has never been used by a president to impose tariffs. They also argued that, by the administration’s own admission, the trade deficit cited by Trump has persisted for nearly 50 years — a fact they said undermines his claim that there is an “unusual and extraordinary” trade emergency.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

They argued that authorizing Trump’s use of IEEPA to continue his universal tariffs would drastically expand executive power at the expense of the other branches of government.

Judges on a three-judge panel for the U.S. Court of International Trade voted unanimously last year to block Trump’s tariffs from taking effect, ruling that as commander in chief, Trump does not have “unbounded authority” to impose tariffs under the emergency law. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit also rejected the administration’s use of IEEPA.

Read the full decision below. App users click here.

Breanne Deppisch is a national politics reporter for Fox News Digital covering the Trump administration, with a focus on the Justice Department, FBI and other national news. She previously covered national politics at the Washington Examiner and The Washington Post, with additional bylines in Politico Magazine, the Colorado Gazette and others. You can send tips to Breanne at Breanne.Deppisch@fox.com, or follow her on X at @breanne_dep.

From longshot lawsuit to landmark ruling: How a family toy business took on Trump’s tariffs

By Nicholas P. Brown and Eric Cox
February 20, 2026 5:48 PM UTC Updated 2 hours ago

节点运行失败
Item 1 of 3 Rick Woldenberg, CEO of Learning Resources and hand2mind, who sued the Trump administration over tariffs that adversely impacted his toy companies and won, poses for a picture, in Vernon Hills, Illinois, U.S., February 20, 2026. REUTERS/Eric Cox

[1/3]Rick Woldenberg, CEO of Learning Resources and hand2mind, who sued the Trump administration over tariffs that adversely impacted his toy companies and won, poses for a picture, in Vernon Hills, Illinois, U.S., February 20, 2026. REUTERS/Eric Cox [Purchase Licensing Rights, opens new tab]

• Summary
• Companies

• Supreme Court strikes down Trump’s tariffs under IEEPA
• Learning Resources among first to sue, could get refunds
• Refund process expected to be complex, uncertain
• Trump may use other legal frameworks in place of rejected tariffs

NEW YORK, Feb 19 (Reuters) – When Rick Woldenberg took the reins of his family’s toy business, Learning Resources Inc, nearly three decades ago, politics and litigation were not on his agenda. Then he became a central figure in one of the most significant U.S. Supreme Court rulings of the last several years.

The court on Friday struck down President Donald Trump’s imposition of unprecedented tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, after a rash of importers, U.S. state governments and others sued.

The Reuters Inside Track newsletter is your essential guide to the biggest events in global sport. Sign up here.

Advertisement · Scroll to continue

Illinois-based Learning Resources, which imports most of the educational toys it sells from China, was one of the first small businesses to bring a lawsuit against Trump’s tariffs last April. Along with other importers, the company could now be entitled to a share of billions of dollars in refunds – although the Supreme Court did not decide how or when that may happen.

“My hope is that this ruling is an opportunity for everyone to take a breath and think about what is important and what needs to get done,” Woldenberg told Reuters on Friday.

The White House did not immediately comment on the ruling.

Advertisement · Scroll to continue

Small businesses like Learning Resources and its sister company, hand2mind, represent about 97% of U.S. importers and bring in some $868 billion worth of goods annually, according to a 2025 U.S. Chamber of Commerce report that described Trump’s tariffs as a threat to such businesses’ survival.

Within days of Trump’s tariff announcement last April, Woldenberg was speaking out against the duties. In June, after Learning Resources won its lawsuit in the district court, it asked the U.S. Supreme Court to take up an early review.

“I decided that I would have a lot harder time dealing with not acting than acting,” Woldenberg told Reuters in a separate interview on Thursday, adding he did not see his legal battle as political.

“It’s about taxes,” he said. “They owe us money… every American agrees we pay too much in taxes, and no one will want to pay a tax they don’t have to pay.”

Despite Friday’s Supreme Court ruling, the issue is far from resolved. Experts say the process of getting refunds will be long and legally complex, and that Trump could try to salvage tariffs by using other legal frameworks.

FAMILY BUSINESS

---

For Woldenberg, toys are in the blood. Learning Resources was founded in 1984 by his mother and has roots in a business started by Woldenberg’s grandfather more than a century ago.

Together with hand2mind, it makes educational items like Alphabet Coffee Cups – which help kids distinguish uppercase and lowercase letters – and Numberblocks, a toy set for math learning inspired by a British TV series of the same name.

Learning Resources has about 500 employees and sells in some 100 countries. Most of its production is in China – which faced some of the most crippling tariffs – and Woldenberg estimated he paid some $10 million in duties in 2025.

He also had to cut back on company expansion plans, such as adding 600,000 square feet of warehouse and office space in Illinois, and divert employees to tasks like re-engineering the company’s supply chain. Sales, marketing and product development plans changed overnight. The company went from trying to innovate to trying to react and survive. It spent less. It took in less. “We shrank last year,” he said.

A key focus of his anti-tariff campaign, he said, was to illustrate the practical challenges of what the Trump administration was pushing companies to do: move manufacturing back to the U.S.

“Moving a supply chain out of a country on an emergency basis, as if bombs are falling on your head, is a project no one is prepared for,” he said.

To make toys, Woldenberg’s businesses use more than 30 injection machines, each weighing several tons, which pump molten plastic into thousands of steel casings. Moving it would be prohibitively expensive, he said, and next to impossible logistically, demanding dozens of flatbed trucks and a series of cranes.

There is also the issue of expertise. Woldenberg’s partner factory in China has been making toys for years, with a highly specialized workforce and the ability to meet the toy industry’s high safety standards. Replicating that, he said, could take months or years.

Now, after the ruling, Woldenberg hopes to guide the company back to normalcy after spending much of his energy this past year in court. He is hopeful the money Learning Resources has paid in tariffs will be refunded by the government.

“And as soon as they do, we’ll start spending it,” he said. “We want to run our company again.”

Reporting by Nicholas P. Brown; editing by Peter Henderson and Nia Williams

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles., opens new tab

Walmart and other big companies say tariffs are forcing them to hike prices

February 20, 2026 / 1:23 PM EST / CBS News

Some of the biggest U.S. companies say they are passing tariff-related costs on to consumers, with Walmart this week attributing a jump in prices for certain goods sold by the retailer to higher import duties.

In a fourth-quarter earnings call on Thursday, Walmart said that inflation for general merchandise — or the prices it charges consumers for products like electronics and appliances — rose more than 3%, up from 1.7% between July and September. Most of those products are imported from overseas and are subject to Mr. Trump’s tariffs.

“[T]ariff-related costs lifted prices across many categories,” Walmart Chief Financial Officer John David Rainey told analysts.

Other companies have also recently pointed to Mr. Trump’s tariffs as one factor driving up prices. Columbia Sportswear executives said in an earnings call earlier this month that the outdoor clothing retailer plans to raise its prices for spring and fall merchandise by a “high single-digit percent.”

The company also noted it has taken other steps to mitigate the impact of tariffs, including negotiating lower manufacturing costs with its factories and shifting overseas production to countries facing lower U.S. tariffs.

Also in the apparel sector, denim company Levi Strauss recently cited the impact of steeper levies in raising prices, noting in a January call with analysts that “we implemented additional pricing actions to further mitigate tariffs.”

Other factors companies say have forced them to raise prices include rising labor and health insurance costs.

The White House disputes that tariffs are fueling inflation and hurting the economy.

“Americans have been hearing about one imminent inflation crisis or economic disaster after another for the past year because of President Trump’s tariffs,” White House spokesman Kush Desai said in a statement to CBS News. “Americans have instead experienced cooling inflation, $1,400 in increased real wages and accelerating GDP growth. The Trump administration will continue to deliver a pro-growth affordability agenda of tax cuts, deregulation and energy abundance.”

The Consumer Price Index, which measures changes in the cost of commonly purchased goods, rose a cooler than expected 2.4% in January compared to the same month a year ago — the slowest pace of inflation since May 2025.

Trump administration officials have said tariffs will also shrink the U.S. deficit by establishing fairer global trade terms, energize the domestic manufacturing sector and generate billions in federal revenue.

Are tariffs driving up inflation?

Although inflation cooled last month, it remains sticky. Government data released on Friday shows that another closely watched price gauge — Personal Consumption Expenditures — accelerated at the end of 2025, according to PNC chief economist Gus Faucher.

“Goods prices, which were falling on a year-ago basis as recently as April 2025, were up 1.7% in December as businesses pass along higher tariffs to consumers,” he said in a note to investors.

Data from Adobe also shows that the cost of goods sold online jumped 4% in January from the previous month — the largest one-month increase in the 12 years since the market research firm began tracking e-commerce prices. Higher prices on electronics, computers, appliances, furniture and bedding drove the higher average price increases, according to Adobe.

Recent research from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York found that U.S. businesses and consumers bore almost 90% of the cost of the Trump administration’s levies in 2025.

The Trump administration disputes those findings. In a CNBC interview on Wednesday, White House economic adviser Kevin Hassett dismissed the New York Fed’s research, calling it “the worst paper I’ve ever seen.”

In a Feb. 5 research note, economists from Pantheon Macroeconomics said that businesses had passed only about half of the cost of tariffs to consumers by the end of 2025. But the investment advisory firm expects retailers to further hike prices early in 2026.

As of Jan. 19, the average U.S. tariff rate on imports was 16.9%, its highest level since 1932, according to the Yale Budget Lab, a nonpartisan policy research center focused on the economy. The group noted that goods including apparel, leather products, electronics and motor vehicles are among the product categories most exposed to higher import costs.

https://www.cbsnews.com/video/business-owners-react-to-supreme-court-ruling-against-trumps-tariffs/

‘Tariffs suck’: Some Republicans privately celebrate as Supreme Court blocks Trump policy

‘It’s the right result,’ one House conservative granted anonymity to speak freely said

By Elizabeth Elkind, Alex Miller
Fox News

Published February 20, 2026 12:43pm EST

Some Republicans are quietly cheering the Supreme Court’s decision blocking most of President Donald Trump’s tariffs on Friday, even as it deals a blow to a cornerstone of the commander in chief’s foreign policy and economic strategy.

One conservative House GOP lawmaker granted anonymity to speak freely, for example, said they were “relieved.”

“It’s the right result,” they said. “I am already seeing messages of relief and approval from other members of the Republican conference, as well. I expect that even more will express that relief. This helps to ensure Congress keeps its power over tariffs and preserves separation of power.”

Another Trump-aligned House Republican told Fox News Digital, “I think the Supreme Court rightfully decided that this was an Article I authority.”

GOP MUTINY FORCES HOUSE SPEAKER MIKE JOHNSON TO DELAY VOTE ON KEY PIECE OF TRUMP’S AGENDA

“Conservatives don’t like tariffs as a long-term strategy,” the second House Republican said. “The president was right to use them as a tool, and he was right to use them to get outcomes on certain things. But in a long-term way… it’s a tax on consumers.”

The conservative-majority high court ruled on Friday that Trump did not have the authority to impose tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). The White House’s interpretation of the 1977 law was used as the basis for sweeping “Liberation Day” tariffs that Trump first unveiled last year.

But Chief Justice John Roberts argued that the law would have more expressly mentioned tariff authority if that is what it was meant for.

Roberts said “the president must ‘point to clear congressional authorization’ to justify his extraordinary assertion of the power to impose tariffs,” which “he cannot.”

TRUMP’S TARIFF BOOM HITS RECORD HIGHS AS SUPREME COURT SHOWDOWN LOOMS

The ruling, and subsequent wave of relief, isn’t the first time Republicans have bucked Trump and his tariffs. The Senate on several occasions has voted against specific parts of the strategy, and the House voted last week to end Trump’s emergency declaration on Canada aimed at ending tariffs there.

“Article One gives tariff authority to Congress. This was a common sense and straightforward ruling by the Supreme Court. I feel vindicated as I’ve been saying this for the last 12 months,” Rep. Don Bacon, R-Neb., one of six House Republicans who voted against the Canada tariffs last week, told Fox News Digital. “Besides the Constitutional concerns I had on the Administration’s broad-based tariffs, I also do not think tariffs are smart economic policy. Broad-based tariffs are bad economics.”

One GOP aide bluntly told Fox News Digital after the ruling, “Tariffs suck and are useless.”

Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., one of the most vocal opponents of tariffs in the Senate, contended in a post on X shortly after the ruling that the Supreme Court “struck down using emergency powers to enact taxes.”

“No future administration, including a socialist one, can use ‘emergency’ powers to get around Congress and tax by decree,” Paul said in a statement to Fox News Digital.

WHITE HOUSE ‘LASER FOCUSED’ ON AFFORDABILITY AS TRUMP SOFTENS TARIFF STRATEGY

But not every Republican was thrilled by the result, nor their colleagues’ attitude toward the hefty blow dealt to Trump’s agenda and the ripple effect it could have on his economic policies. One Republican source described the outpouring of relief or opposition as “50/50.”

A GOP Senate source told Fox News Digital, “If this is a relief to any Republican, then they clearly don’t care about their president’s agenda.”

“The administration will find a way around this, and should, but anyone who’s celebrating right now is probably missing a part of their brain,” the source said. “I don’t understand how someone can see President Trump and the American people lose trillions of dollars and smile.”

Sen. Roger Marshall, R-Kan., told Fox News Digital that he was disappointed by the decision, but not surprised, and noted that the court was divided on the issue.

“President Trump’s tariffs were delivering results — bringing our trading partners to the table, securing ten trade agreements, and driving supply chains and manufacturing back to the United States,” Marshall said. “These tools were also advancing our national security interests, including pressuring countries like India to stop purchasing Russian oil.”

A third House Republican, granted anonymity to speak candidly, told Fox News Digital the Supreme Court decision was “a severe blow” because the tariffs “were making progress that we finally have on fair trade.”

Elizabeth Elkind is a politics reporter for Fox News Digital leading coverage of the House of Representatives. Previous digital bylines seen at Daily Mail and CBS News.

Follow on Twitter at @liz_elkind and send tips to elizabeth.elkind@fox.com

This week on “Sunday Morning” (Feb. 22)

2026-02-20T12:25:46-0500 / CBS News

By David Morgan

February 20, 2026 / 12:25 PM EST / CBS News

[Add CBS News on Google]

The Emmy Award-winning “CBS News Sunday Morning” is broadcast on CBS Sundays beginning at 9:00 a.m. ET. “Sunday Morning” also[streams on the CBS News app]beginning at 11:00 a.m. ET. ([Download it here].)

https://youtu.be/9CxEnECKs9U
https://youtu.be/ywFDoT7LBbQ
https://www.cbsnews.com/video/from-the-archives-robert-duvall/
https://youtu.be/cA6sPJcaEUs
https://youtu.be/Oi5EP81HzZw

The latest GDP data isn’t as bad as it looks. Here’s what to know.

February 20, 2026 / 1:20 PM EST / CBS News

After humming along at a robust pace for much of 2025, the economy hit a wall in the fourth quarter, with a six-week government shutdown and slowdown in consumer spending stunting growth at the end of the year.

Gross domestic product — which measures the nation’s output of goods and services — grew at a meager 1.4% annual rate in the fourth quarter, the Commerce Department said Friday. That came in well under economists’ forecasts of roughly 2% growth and is down sharply from the previous three months, when the economy expanded at blistinerg 4.3% pace.

Yet while the GDP number was weaker than expected, analysts say the economy remains on firm ground and is likely to accelerate in the coming months.

“Today’s headline number is certainly disappointing,” eToro U.S. investment analyst Bret Kenwell told CBS News. “When you peel back the layers a little bit, it’s not quite as bad as it appears on the surface.”

The latest GDP data, which was delayed due to the recent government shutdown, was the first snapshot of fourth-quarter economic growth. The Commerce Department will deliver two more readings for the quarter in the coming months.

The government also released the Personal Consumption Expenditures, or PCE, report on Friday, the Federal Reserve’s preferred measure of inflation. Headline PCE grew at an annual rate of 2.9% in December, a sign that inflation remains sticky.

Here are other key takeaways from Friday’s GDP report.

Government shutdown tipped the scales

---

The main reason the economy slumped in the final three months of 2025, according to economists: the 43-daygovernment shutdownlast year,during which hundreds of thousands of federal workers were furloughed and federal funding for a range of programscame to a halt.

Gregory Daco, chief economist at consulting firm EY-Parthenon, in an email called the shutdown a “self-inflicted black eye.”

“The disappointing end to the year largely reflected a self-inflicted drag from the longest government shutdown in U.S. history,” he said.

The lapse in federal spending lasted for nearly half of the fourth quarter, stretching from October to early November. According to Friday’s GDP report, the shutdown reduced fourth-quarter growth by about 1 percentage point, largely due to a reduction in federal government services. The shutdown also contributed to a steep drop in government spending in the fourth quarter.

Consumers pulled back on spending

---

A slowdown in consumer spending also modestly weighed on economic activity last quarter. Spending rose by 2.4% in the final three months of the year, down from 2.9% in the third quarter.

“Spending didn’t fall off a cliff, but it certainly slowed and decelerated from the pace we had earlier this year,” Kenwell said.

Consumer spending is the nation’s main engine of growth, accounting for around two-thirds of economic activity.

Economists expect a rebound

---

Friday’s GDP print comes as other sectors of the economy display strength. Job growth came in higher than expected last month, with employers adding 130,000 positions. Inflation is also cooling.

With the 2025 government shutdown in the rearview mirror, analysts expect the economy to rebound this year. Investment advisory firm Capital Economics expects the economy to grow at a 3% annual rate in the first quarter of 2026.

Michael Pearce, chief U.S. economist at Oxford Economics, also thinks the economy will pick up because of softening tariff pressures and ongoing tax cuts, which he said will boost spending.

“We expect a sharp rebound in the coming months, driven by a larger tax refund season,” he said in a research note.

Edited by Alain Sherter

Trump says he is ‘considering’ a limited military strike to pressure Iran into nuclear deal

U.S. has been building up its military presence in the Middle East

By Greg Norman-Diamond
Fox News

Published February 20, 2026 10:45am EST | Updated February 20, 2026 11:48am EST

[Donald Trump] said Friday he is “considering” a limited military strike on Iran to pressure its leaders into a deal over its nuclear program.

“I guess I can say, I am considering that,” Trump said at a breakfast with governors at the White House, after being asked by a reporter, “Are you considering a limited military strike to pressure Iran into a deal?”

The president on Thursday suggested the window for a breakthrough is narrowing, indicating [Iran has no more] than “10, 15 days, pretty much maximum” to reach an agreement.

“We’re either going to get a deal, or it’s going to be unfortunate for them,” he said.

[THE ONLY MAP YOU NEED TO SEE TO UNDERSTAND HOW SERIOUS TRUMP IS ABOUT IRAN]

President Donald Trump speaks during a breakfast with the National Governors Association in the State Dining Room of the White House, on Friday, Feb. 20, 2026, in Washington.(Evan Vucci/AP)

Trump’s remarks come as the U.S. is building up military assets in the Middle East, sending the USS Gerald R. Ford and its strike group toward the region.

The [USS Abraham Lincoln] and three guided-missile destroyers arrived in the Middle East more than two weeks ago.

[TRUMP SAYS IRAN HAS 15 DAYS TO REACH A DEAL OR FACE ‘UNFORTUNATE’ OUTCOME]

F/A-18 Super Hornets from Strike Fighter Squadron 14 land on the deck of USS Abraham Lincoln in the Arabian Sea in this image released Wednesday, Feb. 18, by U.S. Central Command.(U.S. Central Command)

On Wednesday, U.S. Central Command posted photos showing F/A-18 Super Hornets landing on the decks of the USS Abraham Lincoln in the Arabian Sea.

The next day, Russia warned Iran and “all parties in the region to exercise restraint and caution.”

The world’s largest aircraft carrier USS Gerald R. Ford is seen in the North Sea during the NATO Neptune Strike 2025 exercise in September 2025.(Jonathan Klein/AFP via Getty Images)

[CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP]

“Russia continues to develop relations with Iran, and in doing so, we call on our Iranian friends and all parties in the region to exercise restraint and caution, and we urge them to prioritize political and diplomatic means in resolving any problems,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said, [according to Reuters.]

Fox News Digital’s Emma Bussey and Greg Wehner contributed to this report.

Greg Norman is a reporter at Fox News Digital.

US Supreme Court ruling overturning Trump tariffs could spook bond vigilantes

By Laura Matthews and Suzanne McGee
February 20, 2026 4:58 PM UTC Updated 7 mins ago

节点运行失败
Item 1 of 2 A person uses a video camera to record outside the U.S. Supreme Court building, where justices released their opinion today striking down President Donald Trump’s sweeping tariffs in Washington, D.C., U.S., February 20, 2026. REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst

[1/2]A person uses a video camera to record outside the U.S. Supreme Court building, where justices released their opinion today striking down President Donald Trump’s sweeping tariffs in Washington, D.C., U.S., February 20, 2026. REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst [Purchase Licensing Rights, opens new tab]

• Summary
• Companies

• Stocks, bond yields edge higher as justices strike down IEEPA tariffs
• Refund uncertainty looms on $175 billion tariffs
• Potential for Treasury selloff remains amid deficit concerns

Feb 20 (Reuters) – The U.S. Supreme Court’s Friday ruling striking down President Donald Trump’s sweeping tariffs produced a muted rally in global stock markets while stoking worries among so-called bond vigilantes about government finances and higher bond yields.

The decision could dent risk appetite among investors, especially after Trump announced Friday afternoon, as widely expected, that he will explore other options to re-impose the import duties. That could weigh on sectors with high foreign revenues or those sensitive to changes in the price of raw materials and components, investors said, citing tech, materials, energy, and industrials.

The Reuters Inside Track newsletter is your essential guide to the biggest events in global sport. Sign up here.

Advertisement · Scroll to continue

Report Ad[image_2]

The court upheld a lower court’s decision that the Republican president exceeded his authority under the 1977 law that he used to justify the duties. The government may now have to pay back $150 billion to $200 billion to U.S. and foreign companies that paid them. This could boost automakers, consumer goods importers and other sectors, said investors.

The benchmark S&P 500 stock index (.SPX), opens new tab initially rose about 0.5% on the news and after a bumpy trade was up 0.4% mid-afternoon. Retailers, other consumer cyclical stocks and ETFs with exposure to overseas markets enjoyed a healthy bounce initially, while the State Street SPDR S&P Retail ETF, which tracks large retailers, gyrated from a small loss to a small gain of 0.5%.

Advertisement · Scroll to continue

Shares in some major U.S. trading partners fared better, with the iShares MSCI Mexico ETF (EWW.P), opens new tab 1.26% ahead, the iShares MSCI South Korea ETF (EWY.P), opens new tab logging a 4.29% gain and Canada’s TSX Composite Index (.GSPTSE), opens new tab rallying 0.40%.

Republicans counter Democrat claims on SAVE Act voter ID legislation | Fox News

By Alex Miller, Elizabeth Elkind | Fox News

Published February 20, 2026 12:23pm EST

[Democrats fight ‘SAVE Act’ for election integrity, Rep. Steil responds to Schumer’s stance]

Rep. Bryan Steil, R-Wis., weighs in as White House and Republicans criticize Democrats for opposing the SAVE Act for election integrity, which includes voter ID.

NEW You can now listen to Fox News articles!

Listen to this article

5 min

Congressional Republicans are pushing back against Democratic claims that their marquee voter ID legislation would wreak havoc on elections in the country.

Congressional Democrats have panned the Safeguarding American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) America Act as a tool of voter suppression — saying it’s a bill that allows the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to monitor Americans’ voter information and create barriers for married women to vote, among several other claims.

Along with requiring photo ID to vote, the bill would require proof of citizenship to register to vote in federal elections, mandate states to actively verify and remove noncitizens from voter rolls, expand information sharing with federal agencies, including DHS, to verify citizenship and create new criminal penalties for registering noncitizens to vote.

[GOP WARNS DEMOCRATS USING DHS SHUTDOWN TO STALL SENATE VOTER ID PUSH]

[chuck schumer and hakeem jeffries]

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., right, have panned the SAVE America Act as “Jim Crow 2.0” and warned it would be a mechanism of widespread voter suppression.(J. Scott Applewhite/AP Photo)

Trump has time and again pushed voter ID, calling the election reforms in the bill a “CAN’T MISS FOR RE-ELECTION IN THE MIDTERMS, AND BEYOND.”

Some of the bill’s strongest proponents fact-checked those claims in interviews with Fox News Digital.

“If you look at what it actually says, rather than what Democrats aggressively and, I believe, disingenuously are arguing right now — they’re overlooking the requirements of the [SAVE America Act] — those requirements are actually really generous,” Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, told Fox News Digital. “They’re really flexible.”

Here’s a closer look at some of the most common claims Democrats have made about the SAVE America Act — and how Republican supporters of the bill are responding.

Claim: ‘Federalizing voter suppression’

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., has routinely bashed the SAVE America Act as “Jim Crow 2.0” — the segregationist laws of the Deep South largely done away with by the Civil Rights Act.

“It has nothing to do with protecting our elections and everything to do with federalizing voter suppression,” Schumer said earlier in February on the Senate floor.

But Republicans argued that Democrats were being “hypocritical” in their voter suppression charge, particularly when it comes to voter ID.

[TOM EMMER BLASTS DEMOCRATS’ DOUBLE STANDARD ON SAVE ACT: ‘THEY REQUIRE PHOTO IDS’ AT THEIR OWN DNC]

[Chip Roy talks with members of the press after a Capitol Hill news conference during a government shutdown.]

Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, speaks to reporters after a news conference on Capitol Hill on Oct. 20, 2025, in Washington, D.C.(Andrew Harnik/Getty)

Sen. Rick Scott, R-Fla., whose home state is one of 36 that either requests or requires a form of photo identification before voting, argued that voter ID laws across the country had no effect on turnout.

“This idea that they’re saying that it’s going to suppress any vote — it’s never done that anywhere,” Scott told Fox News Digital. “They said that when Georgia passed it, and they had record turnout. So it’s not true at all. I mean, how many people do you know who don’t have an ID?”

Claim: DHS will have access to legal voters’ data

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., argued during a press conference that this iteration of the SAVE Act — with its new name — is “worse” than the version that passed the House in April because it gave DHS access to Americans’ voter data.

He appeared to be referring to a provision that would allow DHS to begin potential deportation proceedings against a noncitizen found on a state’s voter rolls.

“This version, as I understand it, would actually give DHS the power to get voting records from states across the country,” Jeffries said earlier in February. “Why would these extremists think that’s a good idea? That we as Democrats are going to accept at this moment in time? We’d want DHS and ICE, who have been brutally, viciously and violently targeting everyday Americans, to have more data about the American people? It’s outrageous.”

Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, who led both the SAVE Act and SAVE America Act in the House, argued Democrats were “really reaching” for criticism.

“This actually allows and empowers states to be able to — as many of them want to do — check their voter rolls against the citizenship database that they’re currently prohibited from doing under a judicial interpretation of federal law,” Roy said.

“So, long-winded way of saying, no — the SAVE system exists, we have citizenship data, and we’re simply going to allow the checking of voter rolls against citizenship data.”

[THUNE GUARANTEES VOTER ID BILL TO HIT THE SENATE DESPITE SCHUMER, DEM OPPOSITION: ‘WE WILL HAVE A VOTE’]

[Senator Mike Lee during a confirmation hearing]

Senator Mike Lee, a Republican from Utah and chairman of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, during a confirmation hearing in Washington, D.C., on Thursday, Jan. 16, 2025.(Al Drago/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

Claim: Suppresses married women’s right to vote

Another oft-repeated argument by Democrats is that the legislation would make it harder for American women to vote — specifically married women whose last names are now different from those on their birth certificates.

That’s because the bill would require proof of citizenship, like a birth certificate or a Real ID, to register to vote.

“Republicans aren’t truly afraid of noncitizens voting, which we all know is already illegal, already grounds for deportation,” House Minority Whip Katherine Clark, D-Mass., said earlier this month. “They’re afraid of women voting.”

Rep. Emilia Sykes, D-Ohio, said during the same press conference, “If your current name does not exactly fit and match the name on your birth certificate or citizenship papers, you could be blocked from registering to vote, even if you are a lifelong naturalized or American-born citizen.”

But Roy again said this was untrue.

[CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP]

“This is absolute nonsense, and we specifically allow for a provision to make sure that no one can possibly be left behind,” he said.

“If a woman tried to register to vote with different names on her birth certificate and driver’s license,” Roy said. “We literally put in the statute that all you have to do is sign an affidavit under penalty of perjury that, ‘I am that person. This is my birth certificate … and this is my driver’s license that is reflecting my married name.’”

Alex Miller is a writer for Fox News Digital covering the U.S. Senate.

Sponsored Stories You May Like

[Oregon Homeowners Are Getting Their Old Roof Replaced For Almost Nothing Roofing Discount Ad is Hidden Please tell us why you hid this ad? Inappropriate Misleading Misinformation Repetitive Irrelevant Distracting]

[Oregon Launches New Policy For “Senior Drivers” on Friday Auto Savings Ad is Hidden Please tell us why you hid this ad? Inappropriate Misleading Misinformation Repetitive Irrelevant Distracting]

[AI in Manufacturing: Productivity, Protection and Maintaining a Human Touch MHISpectra Ad is Hidden Please tell us why you hid this ad? Inappropriate Misleading Misinformation Repetitive Irrelevant Distracting]

[Why are people crazy for this wireless silk bra?LILYSILK Ad is Hidden Please tell us why you hid this ad? Inappropriate Misleading Misinformation Repetitive Irrelevant Distracting]

[FDA-approved GLP-1 Medications Now Available – Check if you qualify Forbes Ad is Hidden Please tell us why you hid this ad? Inappropriate Misleading Misinformation Repetitive Irrelevant Distracting]

[Understanding Pharmacologic Options in Huntington Related Care nourishroot Ad is Hidden Please tell us why you hid this ad? Inappropriate Misleading Misinformation Repetitive Irrelevant Distracting]

More From Fox News

[President Trump says admin has ‘alternatives’ after Supreme Court ruling on tariffs Fox News]

[UEFA Opens Up Racism Investigation After Vinicius-Gianluca Prestianni Incident Sports]

[Trump weighs limited strike on Iran amid military buildup in Middle East Fox News]

[Former CIA chief Dan Hoffman on potential US-Iran war Fox News]

[President Trump on tariff ruling: I am ‘ashamed’ of certain members of the court Fox News]

[Jamie Lissow REVEALS the real reason Dems want UFOs Fox News]

More From Fox News

[Intense snowfall buries South Lake Tahoe | Latest Weather Clips]

[Breaking down the weekend nor’easter threat | Latest Weather Clips]

[Weather in America: February 20, 2026 | Latest Weather Clips]

[Chances for impactful snow from nor’easter increasing for Boston | Latest Weather Clips]

[Extreme fire threat hits the Plains | Latest Weather Clips]

[Severe storms blast Ohio Valley Thursday as cold front heads east | Latest Weather Clips]

[Massive snow hits eastbound I 80 near Castle Peak | Latest Weather Clips]

[Winter storm blasts Midwest | Latest Weather Clips]

[Winter is making a roaring comeback | Latest Weather Clips]

Related Topics

• Politics
• Senate
• House Of Representatives
• Elections

More From Fox News

[Friday flights now cheapest as traditional travel booking wisdom dies according to new data]

[You can face jail time if you violate this town ordinance during imminent avalanche danger]

[Robinhood CIO Stephanie Guild discusses investment strategy and the ‘3 R’s’ for 2026]

[White House responds to Maryland governor telling Trump admin to ‘do your job’ after Potomac sewage dump]

[Harrowing rescuers save people trapped in remote national forest amid dangerous winter weather]

[Hundreds of NYC roles reportedly included in Amazon’s job reduction plan]

More from Politics

[Anna Murdoch-Mann, author and philanthropist, dead at 81]

23 mins ago

Anna Murdoch-Mann, author and philanthropist, dead at 81

[Trump announces 10% global tariff, criticizes Supreme Court justices]

28 mins ago

Trump announces 10% global tariff, criticizes Supreme Court justices

[Trump gives grudging praise to liberal trio who helped sink his tariffs]

54 mins ago

Trump gives grudging praise to liberal trio who helped sink his tariffs

[Democrats cheer Supreme Court move blocking Trump tariffs — despite past support for trade duties]

1 hour ago

Democrats cheer Supreme Court move blocking Trump tariffs — despite past support for trade duties

Promoted

[Is Social Media Addictive by Design? Inside the Mark Zuckerberg Trial That Could Change the Internet Forever.]

[placeholder]

[Fox News Politics]

Fox News Politics

Get the latest updates from the 2024 campaign trail, exclusive interviews and more Fox News politics content.

Arrives Weekdays

By entering your email and clicking the Subscribe button, you agree to the Fox News Privacy Policy and Terms of Use, and agree to receive content and promotional communications from Fox News. You understand that you can opt-out at any time.

Subscribe
Subscribed

Subscribe
You’ve successfully subscribed to this newsletter!

• #### U.S.

• Blue City Crime
• Campus Radicals
• Border Crisis
• True Crime

• #### Politics

• Donald Trump
• Senate
• House
• Judiciary
• Foreign Policy
• Fox News Polls
• 2025 Elections Coverage

• #### World

• U.N.
• Conflicts
• Terrorism
• Disasters
• Global Economy
• Environment
• Religion
• Scandals

• #### Opinion

• #### Media

• FOX Nation Coverage

• #### Entertainment

• Former Prince Andrew
• Sydney Sweeney
• Royal Families
• Country Music

• #### Sports

• NFL
• College Football
• MLB
• NASCAR
• INDYCAR
• NBA
• NHL
• Golf
• Tennis
• FIFA WORLD CUP 26
• UFC
• WWE

• #### Lifestyle

• Travel
• Food & Drink
• Faith
• Discovery
• Games & Quizzes

• #### Health

• Weight Loss
• Cancer
• Brain Health
• Sleep
• Heart Health
• Healthy Living
• Mental Health
• MAHA

• #### Deals

• Trending Deals
• Gift Guides
• Home Deals
• Kitchen Deals
• Tech and Electronic Deals
• Health and Fitness Deals
• Beauty and Fashion Deals

• #### FOX Business

• Personal Finance
• Economy
• Markets
• Watchlist
• Lifestyle
• Real Estate
• Tech

• #### Science & Tech

• Air & Space
• Security
• Innovation
• Video Games
• Military Tech
• Planet Earth
• Wild Nature

• #### Games

• Scattergories Daily
• 5 Across the Letter Word Game
• Downwords
• Sudoku
• Word Swap
• Word Search
• Icon Match
• Daily Crossword Puzzle
• Mini Crossword Puzzle

• #### Watch Live

• FOX News Shows
• Programming Schedule
• On Air Personalities
• Full Episodes
• Show Clips
• News Clips

• #### About

• Contact Us
• Careers
• Fox Around the World
• Advertise With Us
• Media Relations
• Corporate Information
• Compliance

• #### Apps & Products

• FOX News Go
• FOX Weather
• FOX Nation
• FOX Noticias
• FOX News Shop
• FOX News Radio
• Outkick
• FOX News Newsletters
• FOX News Podcasts
• FOX One

• #### U.S.

• Blue City Crime
• Campus Radicals
• Border Crisis
• True Crime

• #### Politics

• Donald Trump
• Senate
• House
• Judiciary
• Foreign Policy
• Fox News Polls
• 2025 Elections Coverage

• #### World

• U.N.
• Conflicts
• Terrorism
• Disasters
• Global Economy
• Environment
• Religion
• Scandals

• #### Opinion

• #### Media

• FOX Nation Coverage

• #### Entertainment

• Former Prince Andrew
• Sydney Sweeney
• Royal Families
• Country Music

• #### Sports

• NFL
• College Football
• MLB
• NASCAR
• INDYCAR
• NBA
• NHL
• Golf
• Tennis
• FIFA WORLD CUP 26
• UFC
• WWE

• #### Lifestyle

• Travel
• Food & Drink
• Faith
• Discovery
• Games & Quizzes

• #### Health

• Weight Loss
• Cancer
• Brain Health
• Sleep
• Heart Health
• Healthy Living
• Mental Health
• MAHA

• #### Deals

• Trending Deals
• Gift Guides
• Home Deals
• Kitchen Deals
• Tech and Electronic Deals
• Health and Fitness Deals
• Beauty and Fashion Deals

• #### FOX Business

• Personal Finance
• Economy
• Markets
• Watchlist
• Lifestyle
• Real Estate
• Tech

• #### Science & Tech

• Air & Space
• Security
• Innovation
• Video Games
• Military Tech
• Planet Earth
• Wild Nature

• #### Games

• Scattergories Daily
• 5 Across the Letter Word Game
• Downwords
• Sudoku
• Word Swap
• Word Search
• Icon Match
• Daily Crossword Puzzle
• Mini Crossword Puzzle

• #### Watch Live

• FOX News Shows
• Programming Schedule
• On Air Personalities
• Full Episodes
• Show Clips
• News Clips

• #### About

• Contact Us
• Careers
• Fox Around the World
• Advertise With Us
• Media Relations
• Corporate Information
• Compliance

• #### Apps & Products

• FOX News Go
• FOX Weather
• FOX Nation
• FOX Noticias
• FOX News Shop
• FOX News Radio
• Outkick
• FOX News Newsletters
• FOX News Podcasts
• FOX One

• Facebook
• Twitter
• Instagram
• Youtube
• Flipboard
• LinkedIn
• Slack
• RSS
• Newsletters
• Spotify
• iHeartRadio

[Fox News]

• Terms of Use
• New Privacy Policy
• Your Privacy Choices
• Closed Caption Policy
• Help
• Contact Us
• Accessibility Statement
• News Sitemap
• Video Sitemap

This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. ©2026 FOX News Network, LLC. All rights reserved. Quotes displayed in real-time or delayed by at least 15 minutes. Market data provided by Factset. Powered and implemented by FactSet Digital Solutions. Legal Statement. Mutual Fund and ETF data provided by LSEG.

[Close modal]

[Continue]

https://www.foxnews.com/video/6389576297112

NASA targets March 6 for launch of long-awaited Artemis II moon mission

February 20, 2026 / 2:55 PM EST / CBS News

With a successful fueling test behind them, NASA managers on Friday said the agency has a good shot at launching the Artemis II mission on March 6, sending four astronauts on a long-awaited trip around the moon.

Artemis II commander Reid Wiseman, pilot Victor Glover, mission specialist Christina Koch and Canadian astronaut Jeremy Hansen are expected to enter pre-flight medical quarantine Friday evening at the Johnson Space Center in Houston.

An early evening shot of NASA’s huge Space Launch System rocket atop pad 39B at the Kennedy Space Center, awaiting launch on a mission to send four astronauts on a flight around the far side of the moon. NASA

Assuming a two-day flight readiness review next week confirms all systems are “go” for launch, the astronauts will fly to the Kennedy Space Center on March 1 to begin final preparations and enjoy a bit of private time with their families.

They will be the first astronauts to be shot into space by a gargantuan SLS rocket, the most powerful operational launcher in the world. They will be the first to fly aboard an Orion deep space crew capsule and the first people to leave low-Earth orbit for a trip to the moon in more than half a century.

They will follow a free-return trajectory, looping around the far side of the moon and then heading back to Earth for a splashdown in the Pacific Ocean. They will not go into orbit or land on the moon, but they will travel farther from Earth than anyone in human history, beating a distance record set by the Apollo 13 crew in 1971.

Getting through a second “wet dress rehearsal” countdown on Thursday marked a major step in that direction.

“Following that successful wet dress yesterday, we’re now targeting March 6 as our earliest launch attempt,” said Lori Glaze, manager of NASA’s Moon-to-Mars Program. “I am going to caveat that. I want to be open, transparent with all of you that there is still pending work.”

That work includes installing platforms at the launch pad to service batteries in the SLS rocket’s self-destruct system, carrying out a detailed analysis of the wet dress rehearsal countdown and the comprehensive flight readiness review.

The practice countdown started Tuesday night and ended late Thursday after engineers successfully loaded the SLS rocket with more than 750,000 gallons of supercold liquid oxygen and hydrogen fuel. The team then carried out two problem-free runs through the last 10 minutes of the countdown, ending with a cutoff at T-minus 29 seconds as planned.

The smooth-running test stood in sharp contrast to an initial dress rehearsal earlier this month that was derailed by major hydrogen leaks during fueling.

Those leaks were detected in a cavity between the umbilical plates where 8-inch and 4-inch hydrogen lines enter the base of the SLS first stage. That cavity is purged with inert nitrogen gas during fueling and during the first practice run earlier this month, hydrogen concentrations close to NASA’s 16 percent safety limit were noted.

Toward the end of the countdown, when the first stage hydrogen tank was being pressurized as it would be for launch, concentrations shot up to 90 percent.

Engineers replaced suspect seals where those fuel lines attach to the rocket and during the fueling operation on Thursday, concentrations never climbed above 1.6%.

“Obviously, yesterday was a really good day for us,” said John Honeycutt, chairman of NASA’s Artemis II mission management team. “I thought the test went extremely well.”

Engineering teams “are off looking at the data,” he said. “I met some of them this morning (and) so far, we don’t have any indications of anything that we’re worried about. But we’re just getting started, so we’ll go through that and see what the teams come up with.”