The Supreme Court struck down a significant portion of President Trump’s tariffs on Friday, dealing a major blow to his economic policies. The decision quickly drew strong reactions from the White House and beyond.

According to The Hill, Vice President Vance was quick to condemn the ruling, calling it “lawlessness from the Court, plain and simple” in a post on X. He argued the decision would make it harder for the president to protect American industries and ensure supply chain resiliency, though he noted that a “wide range of other tariff powers” are still available to the president.

President Trump also spoke out at the White House, saying he was “ashamed of certain members of the court.” Notably, two of the six justices who formed the majority opinion, Amy Coney Barrett and Neil Gorsuch, were appointed by Trump himself. He did not spare them from criticism, saying, “I don’t want to say whether I regret nominating them. I think their decision was terrible. I think it’s an embarrassment to their families.”

The ruling reflects broader concerns about executive overreach on trade policy

The court’s majority ruled against the Trump administration’s use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose steep tariffs on various countries. This law is meant to give the president power to regulate imports in response to “unusual and extraordinary” threats, but the court found its use here went beyond its intended scope.

Lawmakers from both parties had already raised concerns about using IEEPA for tariffs, pointing to Congress’s constitutional authority over federal taxation. This tension is part of a wider pattern of GOP lawmakers breaking ranks with Trump on key executive power issues.

Today, the Supreme Court decided that Congress, despite giving the president the ability to "regulate imports", didn't actually mean it. This is lawlessness from the Court, plain and simple. And its only effect will be to make it harder for the president to protect American…

— JD Vance (@JDVance) February 20, 2026

A Senate resolution calling for an end to Trump’s tariffs passed last fall with strong bipartisan support. A February poll also found that 67 percent of Americans supported the Supreme Court overturning these tariff policies.

From an economic standpoint, a report from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York found that U.S. businesses and consumers ended up paying about 90 percent of the costs of these tariffs. This directly contradicted the White House’s earlier claims that foreign countries would bear most of the financial burden.

Several prominent Republican lawmakers also came out in support of the ruling. Kentucky’s Republican Senators Rand Paul and Mitch McConnell, both of whom voted for the Senate resolution last October, praised the decision. Senator Paul, who sponsored that resolution, called the ruling a “defense of our Republic” in a post on X.

In defense of our Republic, the Supreme Court struck down using emergency powers to enact taxes.

This ruling will also prevent a future President such as AOC from using emergency powers to enact socialism. https://t.co/M55CZgz4By

— Rand Paul (@RandPaul) February 20, 2026

Senator McConnell said the court’s decision leaves “no room for doubt” about Congress’s constitutional authority over tariffs, adding that “Congress’ role in trade policy, as I have warned repeatedly, is not an inconvenience to avoid.”

He made clear that if the executive branch wants to enact trade policies affecting American producers and consumers, its path forward is “crystal clear: convince their representatives under Article 1.” Meanwhile, Trump has faced scrutiny on other fronts too, including Trump’s comments on Prince Andrew’s arrest drawing widespread attention this week.

The Supreme Court handed President Donald Trump a significant setback on Friday, striking down a broad swath of his tariffs. As reported by Le Monde, the ruling invalidated many of the duties he had imposed under emergency economic powers.

In a 6-3 decision, the conservative-majority court found that Trump had exceeded his authority by using the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act to justify what he described as “reciprocal tariffs.” The justices concluded that the law “does not authorize the president to impose tariffs,” noting that Congress would have needed to clearly grant that power. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote that the statute “contains no reference to tariffs or duties,” affirming earlier lower court decisions.

Within hours of the ruling, Trump responded by signing a new executive order imposing a uniform 10% global tariff on all countries. The order, announced Friday, February 20, applies across the board and is set to take effect almost immediately.

Court limits emergency tariff authority as Trump pivots

The Supreme Court’s decision marks Trump’s most significant legal defeat since returning to the White House last year. Speaking to reporters, he criticized members of the court and said he would rely on separate legal authority to impose the new 10% tariff. The ruling also arrives amid affordability poll fallout.

Trump called out three Republican-appointed justices who ruled against his tariffs, including Gorsuch and Barrett whom he nominated.

"An effort to allow foreign countries that have been ripping us off for years to continue to do so."

He's not backing down.

Already signed a… https://t.co/06xsrSCLh6 pic.twitter.com/FijEYEfviU

— Mario Nawfal (@MarioNawfal) February 21, 2026

Vice President JD Vance also criticized the court’s decision on X, arguing that Congress intended to give the president authority to regulate imports. The administration maintains that broader trade tools remain available despite the court’s ruling.

The decision does not affect sector-specific tariffs already imposed on products such as steel and aluminum. Those measures remain in place, along with any duties that could result from ongoing trade investigations. However, the ruling curtails the administration’s ability to use emergency economic powers for sweeping, across-the-board tariffs under the IEEPA framework.

The judgment also raises questions about refunds for importers who paid tariffs now deemed unlawful. Justice Brett Kavanaugh warned that sorting out repayment could become complicated, as businesses and federal agencies assess how to handle previously collected duties. Separate federal scrutiny has also drawn attention in the Google security system case.

Governments abroad are monitoring the developments closely. Mexico, which sends a substantial share of its exports to the United States, said it is evaluating the potential impact of the new 10% global tariff. Mexican Economic Minister Marcelo Ebrard stated that officials are reviewing possible measures and assessing how the policy shift could affect trade flows.

In Europe, EU officials said they are analyzing the ruling and seeking clarity from Washington. EU trade spokesman Olof Gill said businesses on both sides of the Atlantic require stability in their commercial relationships. France’s economy minister, Roland Lescure, said the court’s decision shows that tariffs are open to legal debate, while European lawmakers are examining how the ruling could affect a tentative agreement involving 15% US tariffs on most European goods.

The United Kingdom said it would work with the United States to determine how the new policy affects its trade arrangements. Canada’s Minister for International Trade, Dominic LeBlanc, said the ruling demonstrates that Trump’s broader tariffs were unjustified, though he acknowledged that sector-specific duties affecting Canadian industries remain in force.

As UNILAD reported, Vice President JD Vance delivered a pointed warning to European leaders over Greenland, suggesting the United States may act if security concerns are not addressed. The comments were made during a White House briefing.

Vance said European governments should take President Donald Trump’s long-standing interest in Greenland seriously, dismissing claims that the administration’s position has been overstated. His remarks align with broader signals from the White House that traditional diplomatic norms are no longer being treated as fixed, a shift previously highlighted in reporting on how the president has ripped up decades of foreign policy toward China and Taiwan.

The vice president emphasized that the administration expects Europe to increase its focus on the autonomous Danish territory. Further warning that inaction could force the United States to step in.

The warning was direct and left little room for interpretation

Vance said Greenland is strategically critical, describing it as essential to both the US and global missile defense. He added that hostile foreign actors have shown growing interest in the region, increasing the need for heightened security.

Journalist: Do you have a message for European leaders regarding Greenland?

JD Vance: My advice to European leaders is to take Trump seriously. pic.twitter.com/BGTMG6n7VL

— Vegas (@vegasyx) January 8, 2026

He then warned that if European leaders fail to take responsibility for Greenland’s defense, the United States may intervene. Vance did not specify what form that intervention could take, saying any decision would ultimately rest with the president as diplomatic engagement continues.

Greenland’s leadership has pushed back strongly against the rhetoric. Premier Jens Frederik Nielsen said threats or talk of annexation are unacceptable between allies and do not reflect how Greenland expects to be treated.

Public opposition within Greenland has also been clear, with residents reiterating that the territory is not something that can be bought or traded. The comments have reinforced longstanding concerns over sovereignty and self-determination.

The United States has expressed interest in Greenland before. During World War II, US forces occupied the territory after Germany took control of Denmark, and the US later offered to purchase Greenland in 1947.

President Trump has repeatedly raised the idea of acquiring Greenland in recent years, describing it as a strategic priority. Reports have indicated the administration has paired diplomatic discussions with firm pressure.

The killing of US citizen Renee Nicole Good by a federal immigration agent in Minneapolis has sparked a major political controversy, with the Trump administration moving quickly to shape the narrative around the incident. Good, a 37-year-old mother of three and award-winning poet, was shot and killed during an encounter with Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers.

Almost immediately after the shooting, senior administration officials publicly described Good as a violent aggressor. Statements from the Department of Homeland Security and the White House alleged that she attempted to run over officers with her vehicle and framed the incident as an act of domestic terrorism, despite no investigation having yet taken place.

According to The Guardian, those claims were echoed at the highest levels of government, with President Donald Trump and Vice President JD Vance both asserting that Good intentionally attacked law enforcement. The comments drew swift backlash from Minnesota officials, including Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey, who sharply rejected the federal narrative and demanded accountability from DHS.

The official narrative quickly unraveled under video scrutiny

Local Democratic leaders continued to criticize the administration’s response as video evidence became public. Governor Tim Walz said multiple claims made by federal officials were “verifiably false,” while Democratic leaders argued the rush to judgment appeared politically motivated rather than fact-based.

Video footage shows Good reversing her vehicle to allow an ICE vehicle to pass before agents approached her car. As the vehicle began to move forward, an officer walked into its path and was lightly brushed as it passed. The officer remained on his feet and appeared uninjured before firing multiple shots at the vehicle.

Federal officials had claimed that multiple officers were injured during the encounter, but no video evidence supports that assertion. Minneapolis Police Chief Brian O’Hara later confirmed that when he arrived on the scene, he was informed that only Good had been injured.

President Trump also circulated slowed-down video footage presented as evidence of imminent danger, though viewing the clip at normal speed shows the officer was not knocked down or visibly harmed. Footage from the aftermath shows the officer calmly walking away from the scene, further undermining claims that he had been seriously injured.

Additional commentary from conservative media figures targeted Good’s personal life, while political analysts noted that the administration’s statements appeared disconnected from the available evidence. Governor Walz said that a full accounting of Good’s life and the circumstances of her death would come with time, emphasizing that she should be seen as a person rather than a political symbol.

The incident has added to Trump’s mounting political complications, coming as Senate Republicans are already uneasy after he recently blindsided them by urging “flexibility” on the Hyde Amendment during high-stakes health care negotiations.

Vice President Vance is strongly defending the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officer involved in the fatal shooting of Renee Nicole Macklin Good in Minneapolis, going so far as to label the incident “classic terrorism,” as per The Hill. This is a pretty intense charge, especially since a Justice Department investigation is currently underway.

Vance spent a good chunk of time at a White House press briefing defending the officer and pushing back against what he called media demonization. However, the administration simultaneously characterized Macklin Good in the harshest possible terms, describing her as a domestic terrorist from a “lunatic fringe” who intentionally tried to kill a law enforcement official.

“What you see is what you get in this case,” Vance told reporters. “You have a woman who was trying to obstruct a legitimate law enforcement officer. Nobody debates that. You have a woman who aimed her car at a law enforcement officer and pressed on the accelerator. Nobody debates that.”

Even as the administration pushes this strong narrative, President Trump inadvertently complicated it during a recent interview

Vance made it clear that while her death is a tragedy, he believes it’s a “tragedy of her own making and a tragedy of the far left, who has marshaled an entire movement, a lunatic fringe against our law enforcement officers.” Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem has also doubled down on this belief, insisting that Macklin Good was committing an act of “domestic terrorism.”

Here’s where things get interesting. Reporters told President Trump that the videos of the incident circulating online were unclear, so he had an aide play a video of the shooting on a laptop right there for them to watch. Before showing the footage, President Trump did condemn the woman’s actions, saying “she behaved horribly.”

Vice President Vance defends ICE officer, blames left for Minneapolis woman’s death https://t.co/4DmoTSpC04

— The Hill (@thehill) January 8, 2026

But after the reporters viewed the surveillance footage, they noted that the angle didn’t seem to show the ICE officer actually being run over. The president’s response seemed to soften a bit after that viewing. “Well,” President Trump said. “I — the way I look at it.” It sounds like even the administration’s own evidence might not fully support the claim that the officer was physically struck by the vehicle.

I’m skeptical that the country will truly buy the “domestic terrorism” label, and I’m not alone. Mick Mulvaney, who served as President Trump’s chief of staff in his first administration, expressed deep doubt. He pointed out that while the action of hitting the agent with a car might be legally justified for the officer to shoot, and Macklin Good may have been breaking the law, most people probably don’t think the appropriate penalty for that should be death.

The hardline stance from federal officials stands in stark contrast to the reactions coming out of Minnesota. Minneapolis Police Department Chief Brian O’Hara said that the shooting was “entirely predictable.” O’Hara stressed that everyone, regardless of political affiliation, should recognize the loss of life is a tragedy. He hopes the community avoids further destruction, especially since they’ve been through so much trauma over the last five years.

Usha Vance, the second lady, was recently seen without her wedding ring during a big public event with First Lady Melania Trump. The reason her representative gave for the missing ring is probably the most easy-to-understand thing you’ll hear all week.

The moment without the ring happened on Wednesday, November 19, when Usha Vance went to Camp Lejeune, a military training place in Jacksonville, North Carolina. She was there with Melania Trump to speak to military members and their families. After photos of the second lady without the ring were posted online, people on social media started talking about her marriage to Vice President JD Vance almost right away.

The second lady, 39, is known for keeping her life private and she rarely talks with reporters. So when a spokesperson actually responded to the rumors, people were listening carefully. The spokesperson gave a simple, clear answer to PEOPLE during all the talk. The statement just said that Usha is “a mother of three young children, who does a lot of dishes, gives lots of baths, and forgets her ring sometimes.”

A viral hug made people talk even more

Honestly, if you’ve ever had young kids, you know exactly what they’re talking about. That’s a really good reason right there. Usha and Vice President JD Vance, 41, have been married since 2014. Knowing she’s managing three young children while doing the work of the second lady makes that reason even easier to understand.The couple has sons Ewan, 8, and Vivek, 5, and their daughter Mirabel, 3.

The reason those rumors grew so fast is that the couple was already dealing with talk from something that went viral in late October. This had to do with the vice president sharing a hug on stage with Erika Kirk, the widow of right-wing political organizer Charlie Kirk. Erika had recently become CEO of Turning Point USA after her husband was killed.

The moment happened on October 29, 2025, during a University of Mississippi tour stop. Erika gave an emotional speech, introducing JD Vance by saying she sees “some similarities” between her late husband and the vice president. She said, “No one will ever replace my husband. But I do see some similarities of my husband in JD – in Vice President JD Vance. I do. And that’s why I am so blessed to be able to introduce him tonight.”

Married 23 years here
I’ve legit forgotten my ring so many times doing dishes, baths, or chasing toddlers that my husband jokes it’s “on vacation.”
Usha Vance is a mom of three little kids. She forgot her ring once.
Leave this woman alone.
That’s it. That’s the post. pic.twitter.com/s2FpzysYV4

— The Undercurrent (@NotTheirScript) November 24, 2025

The hug that came next went viral right away. People online were looking closely at the hand positions because the greeting looked pretty close. While public figures often face intense analysis of their personal lives, accusations against a NASA astronaut’s conduct show how quickly rumors can spiral out of control.

Erika tightly hugged the vice president before moving her hand to the back of his head, while his hands briefly touched her waist.

BREAKING: JD Vance’s wife, Usha, denies rumors she split from her husband after she was seen without her wedding ring during a visit to Camp Lejeune in Jacksonville, NC.

“Usha is a mother of three young children, who does a lot of dishes, gives lots of baths, and forgets her… pic.twitter.com/guq12Y6IS9

— Republicans against Trump (@RpsAgainstTrump) November 24, 2025

However, Erika Kirk has actually said good things about both Vances before. In an interview clip recorded before that viral moment, she praised their support after her tragic loss. She said that JD and Usha “are the most incredible people. Incredible. With such genuine love,” adding that “everything they did for us was so humanized.”

He did end his answer by saying that respecting free will is an important Christian principle, showing they’ve definitely found an arrangement that works for them. In a world where trust between family members is crucial, stories like a man’s disturbing Christmas scheme targeting children remind us how important it is to protect those we love.

On Monday, we reached all-time-high levels of being 12 years old when several government social media accounts shared a deluge of Trump-themed Halo memes. Unfortunately, today those in the halls of power have raised the bar again, making their past selves look downright 13 in comparison.

Now we’ve got White House Deputy Press Secretary Kush Desai and the Department of Homeland Security weighing in, both of whom provided comments on the memes to freelance journalist and Aftermath pal Alyssa Mercante. Desai centered his response around the supposed end of the console wars, which should only matter to you if you died in the 90s while arguing about who’d win in a fight between Mario and Sonic and now haunt the playground you were crawling around on to this day:

“Yet another war ended under President Trump's watch—only one leader is fully committed to giving power to the players, and that leader is Donald J. Trump. That’s why he’s hugely popular with the American people and American Gamers."

(With loud reactionaries, maybe, but with normal people caught in a tornado of tariffs, almost certainly not.)

The Department of Homeland Security’s media team decided to go the openly racist and xenophobic route, because of course they did:

"We will reach people where they are with content they can relate to and understand, whether that be Halo, Pokemon, Lord of the Rings, or any other medium. DHS remains laser focused on bringing awareness to the flood of crime that criminal illegal aliens have inflicted on our country. We aren't slowing down."

Then we have the crown jewel in today’s gold-embossed propeller hat: Vice President JD Vance casually referencing the dumbest, most disingenuous Twitch drama yet during an appearance on New York Post’s Pod Force One podcast. Speaking about his own dog, Atlas, Vance voiced his opinion on CollarGate:

“I kind of obsessively trained him,” Vance said of Atlas. “You could see this: He sits on command, he stays on command. He has this command, place, which is basically if I snap my finger and point, he will run to that place and lay down."

"You don't have to zap him like Hasan [Piker]?" asked the show’s host, Miranda Devine.

"Not like Hasan Piker?” Vance replied in a voice that anyone should be disqualified from running for public office simply for possessing. “ No. No electrocution of dogs here."

"How disgusting is that? What does that tell you about a person?" said Devine, whose unquenchable appetite for boot needs to be studied.

"Well, I think that tells you that they're bad people,” said Vance, 12, who nonetheless possesses the baby brain of someone who was born yesterday. “If you can actually cause suffering to an innocent animal, you're probably the kind of person who doesn't worry about suffering in people as well. And that's been my experience: If you mistreat dogs, that's almost 100 percent a sign that you're gonna be a really terrible person."

Tell that to the 40 million low-income Americans about to lose SNAP benefits. I’m sure they’ll agree with you that the truest measure of a man is his dog, rather than his proclivity for aiding and abetting mass immiseration. Also, I bet JD Vance’s dog hates him, too.

On the upside, while we’ve never been more 12 years old than we are today, we could not possibly become even more 12 tomorrow. I’m sure this is it, and soon everyone will be grownups again.