President Trump announced Saturday that he is raising his worldwide tariff rate from 10 percent to 15 percent, effective immediately. The move came just one day after the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 to strike down Trump's tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act.

Trump unveiled the new rate in a post on Truth Social, framing it as a direct response to the Court's decision.

Based on a thorough, detailed, and complete review of the ridiculous, poorly written, and extraordinarily anti-American decision on Tariffs issued yesterday, after MANY months of contemplation, by the United States Supreme Court, please let this statement serve to represent that I, as President of the United States of America, will be, effective immediately, raising the 10% Worldwide Tariff on Countries, many of which have been 'ripping' the U.S. off for decades, without retribution (until I came along!), to the fully allowed, and legally tested, 15% level.

The president also signaled that his administration "will determine and issue the new and legally permissible Tariffs" in the months ahead, suggesting the 15 percent baseline is a floor, not a ceiling.

The Court's 6-3 ruling and the justices who broke ranks

According to Breitbart News, the Supreme Court struck down Trump's IEEPA-based tariffs in a 6-3 decision. Two Trump-appointed justices, Amy Coney Barrett and Neil Gorsuch, sided with their liberal counterparts against the administration. Chief Justice John Roberts joined them.

Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Brett Kavanaugh dissented.

That Barrett and Gorsuch crossed over will not surprise anyone who has watched the Court's drift on executive authority questions. The idea that IEEPA doesn't authorize tariffs is a textual argument with real weight, and reasonable legal minds can disagree. But the practical effect is unmistakable: the Court removed a tool the president was actively using to restructure American trade relationships, and it did so with the help of justices who owe their seats to the very movement demanding that restructuring.

Trump made his displeasure clear during a White House press briefing on Friday afternoon.

The Supreme Court's ruling on tariffs is deeply disappointing, and I'm ashamed of certain members of the court, absolutely ashamed, for not having the courage to do what's right for our country.

Section 122 and the speed of the pivot

What happened next mattered more than the ruling itself. Within hours of the decision, Trump announced a worldwide 10 percent tariff under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974. By Saturday, he had already bumped that rate to 15 percent.

The speed is the story. Where previous administrations would have spent weeks drafting memos, convening interagency reviews, and issuing cautious statements about "respecting the Court's decision," this White House simply found another statute and kept moving. The legal basis shifted. The policy direction did not.

That distinction matters enormously. Courts can strike down a particular legal mechanism. They cannot strike down the political will behind it. The Trade Act of 1974 has been "legally tested," as Trump noted, and Section 122 gives the president broad authority to impose temporary tariffs. The ground beneath the tariff regime changed; the tariffs themselves barely blinked.

The effective rate tells the real story

Breitbart News economics editor John Carney ran the numbers on Friday night and found something that should reframe the entire debate. The new tariff rate under Section 122 lands remarkably close to where things stood under IEEPA.

Carney noted that his "IEEPA baseline effective tariff rates (with substitution effect) is the Yale Budget Lab's 14.3." He then adjusted downward for exemptions and carve-outs built into the new executive order, estimating the effective rate at closer to 12 percent.

With Saturday's bump to 15 percent, the effective rate likely climbs right back into that range or above it. The Supreme Court handed down what was supposed to be a landmark rebuke of presidential trade authority. The practical impact on actual tariff levels may be negligible.

That is not a story the ruling's supporters want told.

What the ruling actually accomplished

Consider what the 6-3 majority achieved in concrete terms:

• Trump's tariff authority shifted from one statute to another
• The worldwide tariff rate went up, not down
• The administration signaled additional, country-specific tariffs are coming
• The president's political base rallied around the perception of judicial overreach

If the goal was to restrain presidential tariff policy, the ruling failed before the weekend was over. If the goal was constitutional housekeeping on IEEPA's scope, that's a legitimate judicial function, but it came with consequences the majority may not have anticipated.

The broader pattern here is familiar. Institutions attempt to constrain Trump through procedural channels. Trump adapts faster than the constraints can hold. The constraints become the story, and the story becomes fuel. Courts that wanted to limit executive power on trade may have inadvertently expanded the political mandate for it.

The months ahead

Trump's statement that his administration will "determine and issue" new tariffs in the coming months is worth watching closely. The 15 percent worldwide baseline is now set. What comes next are the country-specific and sector-specific rates that will define the actual trade landscape.

Section 122 gives the president room to operate. The political environment, with a Supreme Court ruling that looks more symbolic than substantive by the day, gives him even more. The question was never whether tariffs would survive a legal challenge. The question was whether this administration would find the next door before the first one finished closing.

They found it in hours.