Return to Transcripts main page

One World with Zain Asher

Trump to Speak Soon Following Tariff Decision; Supreme COURT rules Trump's Emergency Tariffs are Illegal; How U.S. Markets are Reacting to Supreme Court Ruling. Aired 1-2p ET

Aired February 20, 2026 - 13:00   ET

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

[13:00:00]

ANNOUNCER: This is CNN Breaking News.

BIANNA GOLODRYGA, CNN ANCHOR: Hello everyone, live from New York. I'm Bianna Golodryga.

ZAIN ASHER, CNN ANCHOR: And I'm Zain Asher. This is a special edition of "One World." Any moment now, President Trump is expected to make comments

about the major Supreme Court ruling on his sweeping tariffs. We'll, of course, bring you those statements, that remark -- those remarks, rather,

as soon as it happens. A short time ago, the court found the president could not use an emergency powers law to impose tariffs.

GOLODRYGA: Yes. It's a huge blow to Trump's economic agenda. The so-called reciprocal tariffs raised duties on America's trading partners, including

key allies. One economic policy expert tells CNN today's ruling is unlikely to be a win for consumers wallets in the short run.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

NATASHA SARIN, FORMER DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR ECONOMIC POLICY: So, far, consumers have paid in something like $150 billion in the form of

these tariffs that were just ruled unlawful. But there's no guidance in this opinion about exactly what's supposed to happen with those refunds.

And even if refunds are ultimately issued, they're not going to be issued to consumers. They're going to be issued to firms. And then you're,

depending on firms, ultimately passing those back to the consumer.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GOLODRYGA: Today's ruling came down while President Trump was hosting the White House breakfast with the governor. CNN has told that he called the

move, quote, "a disgrace." CNN's Paula Newton joins us now from New York with the latest. And as we're expecting to hear from the president any

moment, the administration had hinted about a plan B, knowing that there was a high likelihood that this could be the exact ruling that the Supreme

Court would issue.

PAULA NEWTON, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Bianna, as soon as they heard the arguments in front of the Supreme Court and got an inkling that perhaps

there was skepticism on the part of at least a majority of those Supreme Court justices, they decided to go with that plan B. Now, U.S. Trade

Representative Jameson Greer has said that he has many different things in his back pocket that he can use in order to continue to apply those

tariffs.

There's no doubt of two things, though. As you were just saying, this is a blow to the plan A that the Trump administration had in place for the

economy. And also, for certain here, this adds a lot more uncertainty for businesses and for consumers. And there are a lot of people right now

wondering what that means going forward, because instead of having trade deals that are predictable and balanced and reasoned and having countries

negotiate with the Trump administration, you may have some deals that remain in place, some deals that may be negotiated with different

parameters, other deals that countries may walk away from.

I think the also important thing is we were talking about consumers. I mean, look, almost unanimously, economists believe that tariffs are a tax

and they do lead to higher prices for consumers. That does not mean, though, that some countries do not apply them in relation to industries

that they believe they need to protect.

I think for the American consumer here, when they were looking at getting taxed on things like shoes, I think most analysts will tell you that while

they're not going to get any kind of a refund check, that this will at least perhaps narrow the parameters of those tariffs, which means going

forward, there could be some light at the end of the tunnel for those American consumers who were going to have to pay more of those tariffs

going forward, at least if you listen to what companies have been saying as their revenues have come out and they've been on these conference calls.

I do want to point out, though, that, again, the Trump administration has been using this as a geopolitical lever, and they'll continue to do that in

the months to come.

GOLODRYGA: Yes. So, don't go out shopping just yet. A big win, we can say, though, for lawyers across the country. They are going to be very busy --

NEWTON: As usual.

GOLODRYGA: -- for the next few months. Paula Newton, thank you.

ASHER: All right. Wall Street is digesting the implications of this ruling and weighing the lingering uncertainty about the future if President Trump

tries a different way to slap on tariffs.

GOLODRYGA: Now, let's take a look at how the markets are reacting. Green arrows, but the Dow has been up as soon as the news came out from the

Supreme Court and their ruling. Now, it's up just marginally. The NASDAQ also up about seven tenths of a percent and the S&P 500 just a fraction up

as well.

[13:05:00]

ASHER: Yes, Vanessa Yurkevich joins us live now with more. I mean, obviously, the markets are somewhat happy, but the reaction is tepid

because obviously that doesn't necessarily mean the tariffs saga is completely over. But obviously, this is a huge win for small businesses in

this country and businesses that have generally some businesses, obviously, as you know, Vanessa has passed on the tariffs to consumers. Others have

chosen to absorb the cost of these tariffs themselves. So, business -- big win, excuse me, for small businesses, certainly.

VANESSA YURKEVICH, CNN BUSINESS AND POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, and we know, according to the Congressional Budget Office, that businesses had

been absorbing a lot of these tariffs, but they've been passing them down to consumers more recently. So, 70 percent being passed down to consumers

and 30 percent being absorbed by businesses.

But we've heard from a wide range of industry groups, all the way from the alcohol industry to the footwear industry, really sort of celebrating and

sharing this decision from the Supreme Court. The Footwear Association pointing out that 99 percent of the shoes that are on our feet here in the

United States come from abroad. So, they were being taxed. They were being tariffed. They're saying that they're looking for now some certainty, some

predictable trade legislation to help sort of take that burden off of these companies that have been trying to absorb some of these higher costs.

Alcohol industry saying this is great news because now restaurants and bars can potentially level some of the prices that they've been having to charge

to consumers who here in the United States have been struggling with affordability. Also, the National Retail Association -- excuse me,

Federation, saying that they want to make sure that these tariff refunds come back to companies really quickly. And the National Retail Federation

represents major retailers like Walmart, Macy's and Target.

We're also hearing from Ford, Ford Motor Company here in the United States, just out with a statement saying that they are studying the effects of the

Supreme Court's decision and assessing the implications. So, you have companies looking for any sort of grain of sand that could indicate that

they may be exempt from these tariffs that were in place for so long. However, the auto industry was largely covered under Section 232, which is

another lever that the president could certainly pull if he wants to implement tariffs in another way.

Also, worth noting that we're hearing from the Port of Los Angeles this morning, who is expecting a surge of cargo coming into the Port of Los

Angeles in the coming weeks after the Chinese New Year wraps up in China as factories start to reopen. The executive director there, Gene Sirocco,

telling me that he's already hearing from companies that are going to fast- track merchandise and cargo into the United States, electronics, appliances, toys, footwear, things that are heavily imported to try to

maybe get things in during what they're calling a window, because they do believe that the president is going to try to pull other levers to try to

put tariffs in place in another way, but certainly a win for businesses.

Today, the question mark is about consumers, as Paula was saying. Unlikely that they're going to see that refund, but they may see a dramatic slowdown

in the way that prices have been increasing for them at the different stores that they've been shopping at.

GOLODRYGA: And how soon, realistically, could they see that change in prices at stores, Vanessa?

YURKEVICH: Yes. So, a cargo vessel that left China yesterday was hit with a tariff, meaning that all of the product coming in was hit with a tariff

that usually takes about four weeks to get to the United States. We know that businesses have a lot of inventory, weeks of inventory on hand.

So, I would say that if a cargo ship left China or another country, for example, today, they would be tariff-free. The cargo would be tariff-free.

Businesses would hold that inventory. And that's just good news that they wouldn't have to then think about passing a higher price to consumers. So,

we're probably talking about in a couple months that we may see a leveling.

But, of course, not immediate. Things take a while to get here, and businesses have to decide what to do with that inventory. But a leveling,

perhaps, in the next couple of months for consumers, which is, of course, welcome news.

ASHER: All right. Vanessa Yurkevich, thank you so much.

GOLODRYGA: Well, earlier we spoke with former federal prosecutor Gene Rossi about the Supreme Court striking down President Trump's sweeping

emergency tariffs. He said the move is a win for businesses impacted by those tariffs.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GENE ROSSI, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: It's a big win for Congress. And what Roberts essentially said is a tariff is a tax, and Congress has the

authority, the fulsome authority, to impose taxes, not the president. But when it goes back to the lower courts, the Department of Treasury is going

to be working 24/7 because this is the final say on this issue.

So, now these small businesses and other businesses that were affected by the tariffs, they're entitled to a refund. So, refunds have to be issued

with alacrity, as they say, and it's going to be a huge win for the businesses who had to pay these tariffs.

[13:10:00]

And I've got to say this. I've got to stress this. The countries who are sending goods into our country, they don't pay the tariffs. The businesses

in the United States pay the tariffs. And that's important for people to know. And that's why tariffs are considered a tax. And Congress has the

full authority to do this.

I want to just address something that Justice Kavanaugh mentioned in his dissent. There are other statutes that allow the president to impose a

similar type of tax or tariff, but the scope, duration, and the contours of those actions are very limited and controlled. For example, freezing assets

during the Iranian hostage crisis or other, you know, emergencies.

But here, the tariffs were issued without any end date. They were issued blanket, and that was just a bridge too far for Chief Justice Roberts and

the other justices.

ASHER: Gene, what was the original intention behind the IEPA when it was first implemented in 1977? As I understand it, it gives the president of

the United States authorities to impose tariffs or sanctions or regulate, essentially, economic transactions after declaring a national emergency, or

if there is some kind of external or foreign threat. Can you break that down for our audience, please?

ROSSI: Yes. IEPA -- I have to write it down. The International Emergency Economic Powers Act, IEPA, it was passed after Watergate. And what it did,

because of the Nixon crisis and the exercise of presidential powers, Congress passed IEPA because it was putting, you know, reins on this

presidential power in times of emergency crises, such as the Iranian crisis or instances where a drug cartel is causing havoc to our economy.

But IEPA was limited to emergency situations. And what President Trump and his administration was arguing is that fentanyl and the influx of drugs

into our country was creating this national pandemic and crisis. Therefore, I can use IEPA to impose tariffs.

Well, when you present the evidence of this emergency crisis, it came up short in the eyes of the Supreme Court. It didn't fit the Iranian crisis

and other emergency situations where you expect the president to take immediate action.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

GOLODRYGA: All right. Our thanks to former federal prosecutor Gene Rossi for that analysis. Melissa Bell has the view on these tariffs from Europe.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

MELISSA BELL, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: On one hand, you can imagine a touch of schadenfreude in the hearts of all of those leaders who

were targeted so brutally back on Liberation Day when the announcements of these tariffs were made. But on the other, it does add a huge layer of

uncertainty to a world where essentially unilateral levies are no longer the thing. All of these trade agreements have been put in place as a result

of that Liberation Day and efforts on the parts of international governments to mitigate the consequences of that by seeking deals with the

United States.

So, I'm thinking here, for instance, the free trade deals between Canada, the United States, Mexico and the United States, the U.K. and the United

States, Europe as well. What becomes of them? And it is that whole layer of uncertainty, I think, that is really on the of global leaders as they watch

this unfold from outside.

We've had a couple of early reactions to this. I think most people are just standing by to wait and see how Washington itself deals with the fallout of

this. We were just hearing the question of what the Trump administration now decides to do in terms of continuing to impose those tariffs.

So, there is an element of wait and see until more clarity comes from the American side. But we've already heard in the initial reactions, one from

the Mexican leaders suggesting, noting, first of all, that some of these tariffs are outside this decision, specifically those on steel and

aluminum, but also suggesting that they're going to be looking very anxiously at what it means for the trade agreements between, say, Mexico

and the United States.

Similarly, a commission spokesman just now reacting, saying that the European Commission is going to be analyzing this decision very carefully,

but explaining that what is actually needed on both sides of the Atlantic for businesses is clarity and stability and certainty, precisely what we

seem to have less of as a result of this decision today.

[13:15:00]

And of course, make no mistake, there isn't anyone involved in any kind of trade towards the United States that is not considering whether it isn't

best at this stage to wait and see.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

GOLODRYGA: Our thanks to Melissa Bell for that. Well, we are waiting to hear from President Trump on the tariff decision any moment now. We are

going to go to CNN News Central for more on this breaking story.

(CNN NEWS CENTRAL)

[13:20:00]

END