The trade deals survived the Supreme Court

On February 20, 2026, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act does not let a president impose tariffs. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the opinion. The broad, country-by-country tariffs of 2025 rested on that law, and the obvious question was what would happen to the trade deals those tariffs had pried loose.

When the foundation under an old house fails, the house does not have to come down. A crew jacks it up, pours new concrete underneath and sets it back down, and the family keeps eating dinner upstairs the whole time.

That is roughly what happened. The same day as the ruling, the President ended the emergency tariffs and ordered a temporary 10% import duty under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, which allows one for up to 150 days. The White House said the United States "will continue to honor its legally binding Agreements on Reciprocal Trade." When the 150 days ran out on July 24, new tariffs under Section 301 of the same law took over, with lower rates for partners that had made deals or committed to ban goods made with forced labor.

What is still standing

The U.S. Trade Representative has published the full text of 10 Agreements on Reciprocal Trade: with Malaysia, Cambodia, El Salvador, Guatemala, Argentina, Bangladesh, Taiwan, Indonesia, Ecuador and Jordan. Two of those, Ecuador and Jordan, came after the Court ruled. About 10 more partners, including the United Kingdom, the European Union, Japan, South Korea, Switzerland and India, have deals, frameworks or joint statements that USTR still lists.

The promises are concrete. The European Union said it intends to eliminate tariffs on all U.S. industrial goods and expects to buy $750 billion in American energy through 2028. Jordan agreed to ban imports made with forced labor within five years of the deal taking effect. On the American side, the Section 301 duty brings covered EU goods to a combined 10%, or the normal tariff if that is higher, below the 15% the 2025 framework allowed.

The criticism comes from two directions. The Court said the President overstepped, and Yale's Budget Lab estimates today's tariffs raise consumer prices about 0.7%, roughly $1,100 per household a year. Both points are fair. But notice what the ruling did not do: it did not void a single agreement, and countries kept signing them afterward. The administration complied, stopped collecting the struck-down tariffs and rebuilt on trade laws that spell out a tariff power. Countries do not sign trade agreements with a president whose biggest tariff tool was just taken away unless they want what is in them.

That the agreements are still on the books, I'm certain. Whether every partner keeps every promise, now that U.S. tariffs are lower and rest on narrower laws, I'm not.

The foundation under these deals is newer than the house, and it was poured in a hurry. But the family never moved out. You can read every agreement yourself: USTR posts the texts at ustr.gov under Agreements on Reciprocal Trade.