Bitcoin dips after Supreme Court tariff ruling

TLDR

• Supreme Court curbs IEEPA for broad tariffs, narrowing unilateral executive tools.
• Policymakers may pivot to Sections 122, 301, 232 to reassert tariffs.
• Europe pauses U.S. trade deal; price relief likely slower despite invalidated levies.

The U.S. Supreme Court curtailed the use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) for imposing broad global levies, limiting a key executive shortcut for tariffs. That narrows unilateral tariff tools but does not remove the possibility of new duties via other trade and national-security statutes.

In the immediate political response, President Donald Trump warned of higher tariffs on nations seen as violating or gaming U.S. trade arrangements, as reported by Bloomberg (https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-02-23/trump-vows-higher-tariffs-for-nations-that-play-games-on-deals). The threat signaled that, despite the Court’s decision, policy-makers could pivot to authorities outside IEEPA to reassert tariff pressure.

Europe signaled fallout risks for transatlantic relations. The European Parliament paused ratification of a trade deal with the United States following the ruling, according to NBC News (https://www.nbcnews.com/business/economy/europe-halts-trade-deal-trump-tariffs-rcna260231).

Retail price relief from invalidated levies may be less immediate than headlines suggest. Goldman Sachs’ economists noted that prices rose quickly after prior tariffs but tend to fall more slowly, and estimated core PCE inflation had been boosted by about 0.7% through January, as reported by Business Insider (https://www.businessinsider.com/supreme-court-trump-tariffs-ruling-impact-consumer-prices-goldman-sachs-2026-2).

Immediate impact: Trump’s tariff threat and Bitcoin price reaction

Crypto markets initially treated the ruling as a modest risk-on cue. Bitcoin briefly rose roughly 1–2% to around $67,700 after the decision, according to The Block (https://www.theblock.co/post/390653/crypto-prices-rally-as-supreme-court-strikes-down-trumps-broad-tariff-regime/).

At the time of this writing, Bitcoin (BTC) trades near 65,348 with sentiment flagged as bearish and 14-day RSI around 37.87. Reported volatility near 11.03% underscores the potential for swift, policy-driven swings.

After plans for fresh global tariffs were floated, market optimism faded. Setting an adversarial tone, Trump said countries that “play games” would face “much higher” levies “and worse,” per Anadolu Ajansı (https://www.aa.com.tr/en/live/trump-threatens-higher-tariffs-after-supreme-court-strikes-down-global-levies/3837959).

Taken together, the sequence suggests a push-pull dynamic for crypto: narrower IEEPA powers temper policy surprise risk, but renewed tariff threats revive uncertainty. Pricing of inflation paths and growth impacts will likely steer risk appetite day to day; Goldman’s view that consumer prices adjust slowly helps explain the muted follow-through after the initial BTC pop.

How Section 122, 301, and 232 could enable new tariffs

Even with IEEPA curtailed, other statutes remain on the table. Section 122 allows temporary tariffs of limited duration, up to 150 days, offering a short-window option to reimpose levies, as noted by FXStreet (https://www.fxstreet.com/amp/cryptocurrencies/news/bitcoin-top-cryptos-stay-muted-as-trump-hits-back-at-supreme-court-ruling-202602210018/). Any such move would be time-bound and could interact with subsequent reviews or alternative authorities.

Beyond Section 122, officials could turn to Section 301 or Section 232 to target specific conduct or security concerns. The Supreme Court ruling focused on IEEPA, so these other avenues were not directly altered and, in principle, remain available for new or renewed tariffs.

A separate question is whether struck-down levies trigger refunds and fiscal effects. JPMorgan estimated potential corporate tariff refunds in a $150–$200 billion range depending on lower-court outcomes, as reported by the New York Post (https://nypost.com/2026/02/20/business/trump-admin-could-be-forced-to-refund-200b-in-tariffs-after-scotus-ruling-jpmorgan/). Such flows could widen deficits and complicate policy timing, while any fresh tariffs under alternative statutes may slow or offset price relief for consumers and businesses.