Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Trump Says Supreme Court Ruling Against Tariffs Deeply Disappointing; Trump Says He Will Implement Additional 10 Percent Global Tariff Today; Trump Says We Have Alternatives After Supreme Court Strikes Down Tariffs; Trump Says He Is Absolutely Ashamed Of Justices Who Struck Down Tariffs. Aired 2-2:30p ET

Aired February 20, 2026 - 14:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

[14:00:00]

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Thank you so much, Mr. President.

TRUMP: All the deals are on. We're just going to do it a different way.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Thank you so much, Mr. President. I think there's another war that you stopped and you should take the credit, which is in Syria. Secretary Rubio, after his meeting in Munich with the Syrian foreign minister and the Kurdish General, Mazloum Abdi, he said that President Trump was directly involved with the forces to stop the fighting between the Kurds and the Syrians.

How will your administration make sure that this peace is sustained? And do you support the idea of --

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: Oh, it's a very different topic, and so I don't want to spend a lot of time. But all I can say is that the President of Syria, who I essentially put there, is doing a phenomenal job. He's a rough guy. He's not a choir boy. A choir boy couldn't do it.

But Syria is coming together, really coming together well. And thus far, he's been very good to the Kurds. Yeah.

(CROSSTALK)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Mr. President, what's your message to the Iranian people after two rounds of talks with them? Do you have any message to the Iranian people?

TRUMP: The Iranian people? In Iran? Or people here?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yeah. People in Iran.

TRUMP: They better negotiate a fair deal.

(CROSSTALK)

TRUMP: You know, the people of Iran are a lot different than the leaders of Iran. And it's a very, very, very sad situation. But 32,000 people were killed over a relatively short period of time. They were going to hang 800 -- two weeks ago, hang, hang, some by crane.

They lift them up with a tall crane, and they play them around the square. They were going to hang 837 people. And I gave them the word, if you hang one person, even one person, that you're going to be hit right then and there. I wasn't waiting two weeks and negotiating. And they gave up the hanging. They didn't hang 837.

Supposedly, they didn't hang anybody. But no, I feel very badly for the people of Iran. They've lived like -- they've lived in hell. Please.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Thank you, sir. Mr. President, you mentioned multiple times foreign influence over the Supreme Court. Do you have evidence of that? And if not, will you investigate that?

TRUMP: You're going to find out.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What alternatives are you going to put into place in your relationship with Europe and also those tariffs that have been called illegal? How going -- how they're going to go impact the relationship with Russia that you sanctioned some countries?

TRUMP: Well, I want Europe to strengthen up. Europe has gone woke. Europe is not recognizable when you go into so many places. Not all countries. You look at -- you look at Hungary, you look at Poland, Czech, Slovakia. There are some countries that have gone very much the opposite. Some really -- and some others.

But Europe has to be strong, and they've become soft and not recognizable. You go into some of the countries -- I don't want to be specific, but I think everyone knows what I'm talking about. And they're not recognizable. They've become -- the environmentalists have taken over.

They've got windmills destroying their fields and their beautiful meadows and their oceans, and they're paying a fortune. Now, Europe has to get smart. Europe is getting killed on two things -- energy and immigration.

And if they don't solve both of them fast, Europe is not the same place. Yeah, please.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Mr. President, Justices Gorsuch and Barrett, are you surprised in particular by their decision today?

TRUMP: I am.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: And do you regret nominating them?

TRUMP: I don't want to say whether or not I regret it. I think their decision was terrible. Yeah.

(CROSSTALK)

TRUMP: I think it's an embarrassment to their families. You want to know the truth, the two of them. (CROSSTALK)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Mr. President, there's typically on that $2,000 tariff check -- Mr. President.

TRUMP: I didn't call you. Say it again please.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You didn't call me?

TRUMP: I didn't call you.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yeah, Mr. President, to be clear, do you believe at the end of implementing these new tariff tools, the tariff rate and tariffs will ultimately be higher than they currently are?

TRUMP: Potentially higher.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: How much higher?

TRUMP: It depends. Whatever we want them to be. But we want them to be fair for other countries. And you know, we have some countries that have treated us really badly for years, and it's going to be high for them. And we have other countries that have been very good, and it's going to be very reasonable for them. Yeah.

(CROSSTALK)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Thank you, Mr. President.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Specifically on the tariffs question -- I mean, on the $2,000 --

TRUMP: I didn't call you. I didn't call you.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Mr. President. Thank you, Mr. President. Do you have any plans to travel to India for the Quad Summit? And how do you think your relationship with India is right now?

TRUMP: I think my relationship with India is fantastic. And we're doing trade with India. India pulled out of Russia. You know, India was getting its oil from Russia, right? And they pulled way back, at my request, because we want to settle that horrible war where 25,000 people are dying every month. And my relationship with Prime Minister Modi is, I would say, great.

I also stopped the war between India and Pakistan, as you know. There were 10 planes we shot down. That war was going and probably going nuclear. And just yesterday, the Prime Minister of Pakistan said President Trump saved 35 million lives by getting them to stop.

[14:05:00]

That's -- and I did it largely with tariffs. I said, look, you're going to fight, that's fine, but you're not going to do business with the United States. And you're going to pay a 200 percent tariff, each country. And they called up and they said, we have made peace. OK? I just want to thank you all.

Look, great certainty has been brought back to the economy of the United States and actually the economy of the world, because we generate so much in the world. We're the biggest in the world, and we're now the strongest by far. We were a country that was dead one- and-a-half years ago.

Now we have the hottest country in the world. We're going to keep it that way. Thank you very much, everybody. Thank you. Thank you very much.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Thank you, Mr. President.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Did you say 32,000 were killed in Iran, sir?

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN CO-ANCHOR OF "CNN NEWS CENTRAL": All right, the president there, we were listening to see if he would take that question on Iran. The president very angry about this Supreme Court decision striking down his biggest tariffs, really, the ones I think that are most define his policy that are so important to him. He is so mad.

He is insulting the Supreme Court justices who supported them with specifically harsh words for those justices he appointed and for those appointed by Republican presidents. Well, on the flip side, trying to put a shine on this and say that actually this makes things crystal clear and now, he can actually collect more money in the form of tariffs using other statutes that he has plans to begin doing today.

So it's a really interesting approach that he has here, Boris.

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN CO-ANCHOR OF "CNN NEWS CENTRAL": No doubt. But the president there, getting personal with members of the Supreme Court in ways that historically we haven't seen. I'm not a historian, but I did some cursory research. And you've had previous presidents, Thomas Jefferson, FDR and others, who've been critical about decisions that the court has made.

But we just heard the president of the United States say that justices that he nominated to the court and were confirmed should be ashamed of themselves, that their families should be ashamed of themselves. The president also, as you said, sort of trying to flip this decision to say that, now, there's certainty in the U.S. economy, that the court confirmed that he could put tariffs in the economy, which is not really what the court decided here.

Lastly, as you said, the president installing this immediate 10 percent tariff on all countries around the world. Let's go to Kristen Holmes, who was in that briefing and tried to get a question in. The president had some negative words for our network, Kristen, but nevertheless, he was angry today.

KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Yeah, he is clearly angry. He's been seething about this decision. This is the real core tenet of not just his economic agenda, but really his foreign policy agenda as well. He has used these tariffs as leverage. And he said specifically, yes, he is going this alternative route. Yes, he is going to be invoking this 10 percent global tariffs by using the Section 122.

We know that they are looking into also using Section 301. Those are the things, those trade law that they're talking about to get this done. But that being said, the reason that they had gone this route initially was because this was quicker. They wanted this to be done quicker. They wanted to be able to instate this quicker. And that is why you're seeing this frustration from President Trump.

There were other alternatives. You clearly saw him laying them out there. But he just wanted this to be done with. And I will say, there were several interesting things he said. One, he was asked specifically about the two justices that he appointed to the Supreme Court. The question that I had also tried to ask, which is whether or not he regretted it. He wouldn't answer that. But he said it was an embarrassment. This decision to rule against the tariffs was an embarrassment to their families.

We know that he has ranted in the past about Supreme Court justices, particularly those he has appointed, who don't rule in his favor. But it was very clear here today that he was incredibly angry. He was angry at the court. He was angry at the people that he put into place. And he said so much, saying that they should be ashamed of themselves and of this decision that they made.

Now, one of the things we also saw him do was walk through the dissent from Kavanaugh, who obviously ruled in favor of keeping the tariffs or against them being illegal, and said that Kavanaugh had sort of set up a roadmap for what they were going to be doing now to instate these tariffs, and praised Kavanaugh as well.

Also mentioning that all the Supreme Court justices are still invited to the State of the Union, but barely. But again, you could see how angry he was. This is a core part of what they do, what he has been doing, both in terms of economic policy, paying for different programs, saying that these tariffs are going to various different programs and bailouts, as well as when he goes into meetings with these foreign leaders using the tariffs as an enormous amount of leverage. And really, doing so carte blanche until now.

[14:10:00]

KEILAR: Kristen, stand by for us, if you would. Joan, I just want to get some clarity on something --

JOAN BISKUPIC, CNN CHIEF SUPREME COURT ANALYST: Sure.

KEILAR: -- that Kristen brought up there. I mean, from my reading of this, Kavanaugh provides a roadmap on the ways in which Trump could use his other means to have his tariff policies, as much as he provides a roadmap on whether these tariff collections are going to be repaid. How is that being understood about how clear this decision is about that? BISKUPIC: OK. Justice Kavanaugh, who dissented -- he was one of the three dissenters -- indeed gave a blueprint for potentially going forward. And President Trump does have things he can do. But the majority, what controls here, specifically said, referring to Justice Kavanaugh's writing in this opinion, those statutes that were cited contain various combinations of procedural requirements, agency determinations, and limits on duration and amount. We do not speculate on any hypothetical cases not before us.

So of course, the president's going to put a positive gloss on this. What struck me is the vitriol that he has leveled at lower court judges so much that he now has brought to the Supreme Court justices. So, I think you're exactly right to say he wants it both ways. But here what he's trying to do is to say, I hate them. They're terrible. They're the losers that I've said the lower court judges are.

But they've given me a window. Yes, of course he has a window. He's always had that window. He's always had alternative means. It's just that he cannot go it alone.

SANCHEZ: A disgrace to our nation, against the loyalty of our people, fools, lapdogs, very unpatriotic. How does the court read these comments?

BISKUPIC: OK, I'm sure they do not have their TVs on now. I mean, the justices won't. The justices probably expected some of this. And in some ways, for Chief Justice John Roberts, who certainly is aware of the narrative that he is in lockstep with President Trump, he probably doesn't mind that kind of criticism.

But what he probably really minds is the fact that so many of these judges nationwide, I'm not just talking about the nine Supreme Court justices, but so many of these judges have been under threat. And to what all of you just mentioned, the thing about embarrassment to their families, you know, just as Amy Coney Barrett's family has already been sent the pizzas that a lot of people have been sent.

I mean, there have been -- there are threats against many members of the judiciary. And what Donald Trump said today cannot, you know, must exacerbate the concerns that the Chief Justice John Roberts and his colleagues would feel about that. Presidents have been mad about rulings.

I mean, I was reminded of the 1952 steel seizure ruling where some of President Truman's appointees ruled against him in terms of privately trying to get steel during the Korean War. And Truman was furious. But he would have never done something like this. No other president would have said what he's saying here.

KEILAR: Yeah. Paula, this comment that he's making about how there's great certainty that has been brought back, it's perhaps a hard argument to accept considering how upset he is about the decision.

(LAUGH)

KEILAR: If he were thrilled about the great certainty, he wouldn't be so ticked off, one would think.

PAULA REID, CNN CHIEF LEGAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Yeah. No one should take his interpretation of this decision at face value. Again, he's clearly quite pleased with the dissent, but that is not now the law of the land. And look, this might have felt good in the moment, but this is extremely concerning, not only for the country, calling them unpatriotic, suggesting that they're under the influence of foreign entities.

He was also asked, do you have any proof of that? He said, you'll see, which means no, they don't have any proof of that. But undermining the legitimacy of the Supreme Court is extremely concerning for this country. We know that he has done a lot to try to undermine trust in core institutions, but this is so important because this is really the check on his very expansive definition of executive power. And he still has a couple of major cases right now before them.

One pending, a big one on redistricting, could have implications for the midterms. And then in a couple of weeks, John D. Sauer, who's right next to him, his solicitor general, will go before the Supreme Court to argue in favor of Trump's effort to end birthright citizenship, their executive order. Look, even Trump's own lawyers have said they don't think they're going to win there. So he should brace himself for more losses that could even involve conservative justices.

JEFF ZELENY, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: I mean, I think one thing that the president did not clarify at all is the big question that the market is watching and others are watching. What about the refunds? I mean, he did quite honestly say, after all this time, the court didn't address it.

REID: And he was right.

ZELENY: I think by that, like that was actually sort of a valid point that he made that, you know, what is going to happen with the refunds? And he said something like, you know, it's not discussed, we'll end up being in court for the next five years. He may be right about that.

[14:15:00]

But overall, we have never seen President Trump in this term as angry. It was almost like a child being slapped down in order that, wait, I don't have all the rules. I can't sort of do what I want here. So, you know, I'm thinking back to Liberation Day. They did this under the Emergency Act.

And there were always questions of, you know, is this the right way to go? The Wall Street Journal editorial page the next day questioned that. So that has always been hanging over this. So the White House has expected this ruling. There's no doubt. But the president, I do not think, has expected. He did not expect a 6-3 ruling.

So the loyalty there, he just cannot sort of comprehend how the justices could go against him. But as for the 10 percent across the board tariffs, it's under Section 122. That only gives him about 150 days to impose that.

So he would have to go to Congress and ask for an extension. In this Congress, in this midterm year, that is not going to happen.

KEILAR: It's a very good point.

SANCHEZ: He said he didn't have to when he was asked about potentially doing that. So --

ZELENY: We'll see what the court has to say about that.

SANCHEZ: We'll see what the court has to say about that.

Everyone, please stand by. We're going to take a quick break as President Trump reacts very angrily, personally attacking justices on the Supreme Court after this decision, declaring many of his tariffs illegal. Stay with CNN. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:20:57]

SANCHEZ: We've been following Breaking News to CNN. President Trump fuming from the podium in the press briefing room at the White House over the Supreme Court decision that found that many of his tariffs are illegal.

The president trying to spin this, saying that this legitimizes his ability as president to install tariffs. Also saying that there's certainty now in the U.S. economy, even though there's no clear answer as to what's going to happen to the billions of dollars that the government has already collected.

KEILAR: Yeah, that's exactly right. And implementing, he says now, a 10 percent global tariff using other laws. Of course, there is some fine print there and that is very important.

Let's go to Kevin Liptak, who is at the White House, and has been tracking this. And Kevin, we spoke with you before the president's announcement. You were talking, you said you were getting in the weeds about some of these sections. But the president also got in the weeds, so it was really important that you did that.

This was really an extraordinary appearance, sentiment from the president as he was personally insulting the justices and very angry about this particular decision.

KEVIN LIPTAK, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE REPORTER: Right, and I think it just underscores the president's expectations that people he puts in these positions in independent agencies essentially adhere to what he wants them to do. Obviously, this was now the most high-profile example, but you've seen it before at the Federal Reserve, you've seen it at the FCC.

Clearly, the President irked that these people that he has elevated to these positions have not sort of followed blindly to what he's wanting to do, and using extraordinary language, calling them lapdogs for foreign interests in trying to rebut what this decision was. But just to go back to what the president actually did announce, and we were expecting this, that he would essentially come out and describe some of these alternative avenues that he will now use to put these tariffs in place.

He described this 10 percent global tariff using what's called Section 122. This is from a Trade Act from 1974. It does have a time limit on it. These tariffs can only be in place for 150 days. He said this was going into place three days from now. 150 days, three days from now, is about July 24th.

And so, this is a limited time period that the president can use. And I think the other important aspect of Section 122 is that it has actually never been used before. No president has actually applied these tariffs that it prescribes in Section 122.

And so, the president seems extraordinarily confident that this will survive. He, in fact, said that the Supreme Court allowed him to do this in their ruling. But it almost certainly will also be tested. It provides the president this ability to apply tariffs due to deficit of payments. That's the quote from the act. A lot of people have interpreted that as meant to address trade deficits, but it's certainly not a universal interpretation.

And so this, too, could be headed for the courts. Now, what the president seems to be saying is that they will use that 150-day period to go to these other statutes that require investigations, things like Section 301, Section 232. They will use that time period to conduct these investigations and to try and get tariffs in place to essentially replicate what he had before.

And I think the key word in all this was actually used by Jamison Greer, who is the U.S. Trade Representative. He said it was all intended for continuity, to essentially ensure that the markets and that foreign countries can expect what tariffs will be in place now that the Supreme Court has thrown a wrench in the president's plans. And so very defiant, very clearly having thought about how he was going to respond to this ruling.

But to be clear, none of this is all that certain, even as the president is insisting that he has the legal authorities here.

SANCHEZ: And that puts into question this idea that there's immediately stability now coming for the U.S. economy and trade. Kevin, please stand by.

[14:25:00]

Let's bring in Justin Wolfers. He's a Professor of Economics and Public Policy at the University of Michigan. Justin, great to see you, as always. I wonder if you could pick up there where Kevin left off in talking about how this impacts global trade.

Because I imagine that some of the messaging from the White House, the vitriol from President Trump wasn't just directed at Supreme Court justices, but it also sent a message to foreign countries. Because in a way, the court just took away leverage from President Trump in making these trade deals, right?

JUSTIN WOLFERS, PROFESSOR OF ECONOMICS & PUBLIC POLICY, UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN: It's almost all gone. The president today, he's lashed back with his 10 percent tariff. But just imagine for a moment, I call you and I say, hey, you better do exactly what I want or I'm going to impose a 10 percent and you can make it up to a 15 percent tariff that will last for 150 days and then go away and there's nothing I can do about it.

So the only thing the president's done right now is made him look like he's a tough guy, but he doesn't really hold many cards when it comes to other countries. The other thing the president likes to do is pick off individual countries. He has got some powers left, but very few of them allow him to call an individual country and say, hey, you, you've kind of been annoying me, you've been frustrating me, whatever his grievance of the day happens to be, look out, I'm going to tariff you.

Basically, these existing powers don't allow him to do that. So, it basically means the only thing he can do is the U.S. versus the world for 150 days. If they wait us out, he's done.

KEILAR: A little tariff you, tariff you perhaps going to happen in the short term though, Justin. I do wonder this money that has been collected and the president hinted at this, basically, you know, oh, we're going to end up in court, but a lot of people have paid a lot of money toward that tariff revenue. How do you see that being resolved?

WOLFERS: Yeah, so obviously, the court was conspicuously silent on this issue. I think in terms of the economics, actually, this is much less of a big deal than you might think. So first of all, the amount of money that the administration has actually raised is far less than the president likes to imagine.

It's roughly $140 billion. I wouldn't mind $140 billion, but it's actually not that much in terms of the scale of the whole economy. The things folks at home should know is actually it's not a big deal for you. See, here's why. I buy a lot of my stuff from Costco. Costco is who had to pay the tariff when they imported the olive oil that I just bought. I like imported olive oil.

Costco then raised their price and I had to pay a little bit more for that olive oil. If they're issued a refund, it's Costco who'll get the refund. Now, I can't imagine Costco calling me and saying, Justin, according to our records, you bought a bottle of olive oil three months ago. I'd like to write you a $3 check. So either the government's going to write a check to the corporations who are the importers of record, or they're not.

And that means either the companies will be a little bit richer or they won't be. This has no implications for the future and the future is what determines how they're going to think about prices and the like. And you and I, I'm afraid, we paid the tariffs, but you and I, we're not getting it back.

KEILAR: I know that olive oil you're talking about. It's that with the two bottles. I know what you're talking about, Justin.

SANCHEZ: Are you endorsed by Costco olive oil, Justin?

WOLFERS: Yeah.

SANCHEZ: Yeah? Is that right?

KEILAR: It's frustrating.

(LAUGH)

SANCHEZ: Justin Wolfers, thank you so much. Actually, please stand by, because we're just going to take a quick break. We're going to be back in a few minutes discussing this major Supreme Court decision and the president's reaction. Don't go anywhere.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)