So here's what happened over the weekend: former President Donald Trump decided that if you're going to propose a global tariff, you might as well make it a bigger one. In a post on Truth Social on Saturday, he announced he's lifting his proposed worldwide tariff rate to 15% from 10%, effective immediately. He framed the whole thing as a counterpunch to a U.S. Supreme Court ruling he really, really didn't like—calling it "anti-American."

The timing is interesting, because this escalation lands just as a YouGov poll shows 60% of Americans actually back the court's decision. A lot of those people are pointing to the higher prices they associate with Trump's tariff agenda. So you've got a former president pushing harder on a policy that, according to the polls, most of the country isn't thrilled about. That's a dynamic.

In his post, Trump didn't hold back on the Court. He described their tariff decision as "ridiculous" and "poorly written," and noted the justices acted after "many months" of consideration. He also argued that numerous countries have been taking advantage of the U.S. for decades and said his administration would spend the next few months setting what he called new, legally permissible tariff schedules.

Why This Tariff Talk Keeps Sparking Debate

The Supreme Court ruling Trump is so upset about was a 6-3 decision issued on Friday. It basically wiped out his earlier tariff approach. Chief Justice John Roberts joined five other justices in the majority, and the court said the International Emergency Economic Powers Act does not give the president authority to impose tariffs. That's a pretty clear legal constraint.

And it's not just the courts. Public opinion has been moving against the tariff push, even as Trump continues to argue it strengthens the economy. A Pew Research survey from last year found 53% of U.S. adults said Trump's policies have hurt the economy, and 74% cited inflation, tariffs, and the cost of living as reasons they viewed conditions negatively. People are making the connection between policy and their wallets.

The Economic Reality Check

Trump has repeatedly pointed to tariffs as a way to reshape trade flows. He's made claims tied to a sharp improvement in the trade deficit after his April 2025 tariff rollout. But here's the thing: official figures later showed the deficit rising 95% by November 2025. That's a pretty stark contrast, and it fuels questions about how the policy is actually working in practice.

Economists and trade analysts have also been pointing out that the bill for tariffs largely stays at home. Reports estimate close to 90% of the cost is absorbed by U.S. companies and shoppers rather than foreign exporters. So when you raise tariffs, you're mostly taxing yourself. Trump's Truth Social statement leaned on a different premise, saying the tariff increase is "legally tested" and that his administration will set updated rates over the next several months.

Navigating Legal Limits

This latest tariff maneuver follows Trump's earlier criticism of the Supreme Court's ruling. After the decision, he had announced a new 10% global tariff under Section 122 of the Trade Expansion Act, suggesting these tariffs could address balance-of-payments issues for up to 150 days. This new 15% version is framed as a necessity to counter what he perceives as foreign exploitation of U.S. economic strength.

But the legal walls are still there. The Supreme Court's ruling reflected a significant limitation on presidential authority, reinforcing that only Congress holds the power to levy taxes. So any new tariff schedule has to fit within whatever legal framework the administration can find or create.

What Voters Are Saying

The public sentiment piece is crucial. The YouGov poll didn't just find 60% support for the Supreme Court striking down the tariffs; it also captured how many people connect tariffs to price pressures at the register. In that survey, 66% said they have noticed costs rising for goods, including 88% of Democrats and 68% of independents.

Even among Republicans, the poll showed 44% said tariffs increased prices, while 28% said they saw no impact and 10% said prices fell. So within the former president's own party, the perception isn't universally positive.

With midterm elections approaching and control of Congress on the line, this combination—the court's 6-3 ruling and polling on consumer costs—is shaping how candidates may talk about trade and inflation on the campaign trail. It's one thing to debate policy in the abstract; it's another when voters are telling pollsters they see the direct impact on their grocery bills.

So where does this leave us? A former president is pushing for higher global tariffs immediately after the Supreme Court told him he can't do tariffs the way he wanted. The public, according to polls, mostly sides with the Court and worries about prices. And the economic data so far shows a trade deficit getting worse, not better. It's a policy fight with legal, political, and economic layers all stacked on top of each other. The next few months of "legally permissible tariff schedules" should be interesting to watch.