Court Invalidates Tariffs, Military Options Regarding Iran, Olympic Matchup Preview

0:01The Supreme Court strikes down President Trump's signature tariffs. But will U.S. companies and consumers just end up trading one set of import taxes for another? I'm Aisha Roscoe. And I'm Scott Simon, and this is Up First from NPR News. The president denounced the court's decision. He vowed to continue taxing imported goods. What that means for you today on our podcast. Also, the U.S. now has a lot of firepower stationed in the Middle East. Are strikes on Iran imminent? And then to Milan, the Olympics in a neighborly matchup on the ice. So stay with us. We have the news you need to start your weekend.

0:46The Supreme Court says President Trump's IEPA tariffs, the import taxes he imposed using the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, are illegal. At a hastily called press briefing yesterday, Trump expressed his fury at the court and went on to announce a new global tariff and threaten more. It's a big development in the Trump tariff saga, and it's by no means the end. NPR White House correspondent Daniel Kurtzleben joins us now. Danielle, thanks for being with us. Yeah, good morning, Scott. President Trump, obviously not happy. You were at the briefing. What did he say? Well, first he thanked and congratulated the justices who did side with him.

1:26And then he just laid in to the other justices, accusing them of being disloyal to the Constitution. It's my opinion that the court has been swayed by foreign interests and a political movement that is far smaller than people would ever think. It's a small movement. I won by millions of votes. We won in a landslide. So the president is accusing Supreme Court justices of being under the sway of foreign influences. That's just wild. And furthermore, when a reporter asked if he had evidence of that, he said, you're going to find out. So he didn't even say what he meant. All in all, he was absolutely furious.

2:05Tariffs have been at the center of his economic policy and really of his entire second term. And this is just a blow to that. And how large a setback? Because tariffs are more than just about economics for the president, aren't they? Yeah, it's a both and thing. It's about economics and it's about everything else. I mean, he constantly frames tariffs as the thing that will make the American economy great. He really talks about them as a fix for all sorts of economic problems, bringing in revenue, increasing foreign investment. Now, those promises haven't all borne out. He said, for example, that tariffs would shrink the trade deficit.

2:39The latest data shows that that really hasn't happened. But you're right. He likes tariffs for bigger reasons. He liked to talk about tariffs as a way of casting himself as this master tough negotiator. Here he was talking to Fox Business' Larry Kudlow this month. We've allowed countries over the years to take advantage of, by the way, with tariffs. They charge tariffs and we didn't charge tariffs. We didn't charge anything. We were, honestly, we were stupid people, run by stupid people. And besides that, tariffs have just given Trump enormous power. He had claimed he had the ability to impose tariffs when he wanted, at what level he wanted.

3:15And as the head of an economic superpower, that gave Trump massive leverage over other countries. And he used that to make trade deals on pharmaceutical pricing, even for diplomacy. And now he doesn't necessarily have that same power anymore. He did say yesterday that he's imposing some new tariffs. How's he going to be able to do that? Well, he said that first off, he's signing an executive order to impose a 10 percent global tariff under a different law, one the Supreme Court didn't talk about. It's called Section 122 for short. It allows the president to impose tariffs on imports for up to 150 days.

3:50And after that point, Congress is required to vote on it. But in addition, some of the tariffs he's already imposed will still be sticking around. Those are called Section 232 tariffs. They're on an array of products already, like steel and aluminum and cars. So those aren't going anywhere. But yesterday, he also cited a few other laws he said he could use to impose tariffs. Now, there's a whole bunch of these statutes. They're all known by these three-digit numbers I've been talking about. There's 201, 301, 338. But all of those give the president some power to levy tariffs. It's just that the difference between those and the IEPA tariffs that the court struck down is that these new tariffs have restrictions.

4:29Some of them require investigations first, which can take weeks or months, or they have time limitations or limits on the size of the tariffs. So, yes, Trump has some options for replacement tariffs, but they could create some new challenges. Polls tell us Americans are feeling pessimistic about the economy, concerned about the cost of living. How does that measure up with the president leaning so hard into tariffs, which, after all, are a form of tax? Right. That's the big conflict Trump has made for himself here. Trump has been promoting these tariffs, which, yeah, they're taxes. They raise prices for businesses and consumers.

5:05And at the same time, he's been trying to make the case that he cares about the cost of living. And right now, most voters just don't think the tariffs have helped. Many say quite the opposite. So if he continues to lean hard into tariffs, that will really affect what political appetite the country has for supporting the GOP in the midterms. And some Republicans have even come out against Trump's tariffs. So that conflict could get bigger. So it's just remarkable he's sticking to this policy. He could have used this ruling as an exit ramp, but he hasn't. And Pierre-General Kurtzleben, thanks so much.

5:37Thank you.

5:43President Trump says he hasn't decided if he'll launch a military strike on Iran, but there's an expansive naval and air presence in the Middle East waiting for the word. Thanks to a massive military buildup over the past month, we're joined now by NPR National Security Correspondent Greg Myrie. Greg, thanks for being with us. Hi, Scott. Let's begin with diplomatic options. What are they? How realistic do they seem? Yeah, President Trump's is a deal on Iran's nuclear program is his preference. And Iran says it's open to additional talks after the latest round last Tuesday in Geneva. Here's what Iran's foreign minister, Abbas Aragchi, said yesterday on the MS Now program, Morning Joe.

6:24There is no military solution for Iran's nuclear program. The only solution is diplomacy. This is why the U.S. is back in the table of negotiation and is seeking a deal. The problem is the two sides still appear far apart. Iran seems to be talking about some limited concessions here. Trump wants Iran to effectively give up its nuclear program and also scale back its missile program and stop supporting militias in the region. And right now, Scott, no additional talks are planned. Greg, if talks do stall, do we know what military options the president's considering? Yeah, he has a range of options now that U.S.

7:03forces have reached a critical mass in the region. Scott, we're talking about two aircraft carriers, more than a dozen ships, perhaps a couple hundred warplanes, all this spread around the region. Now, at one end of the spectrum, Trump could opt for a brief limited military strike and then pause the attack and give Iran another chance to negotiate. Trump was asked about this scenario Friday and said, quote, I guess I can say I'm considering it. What would the heavier end of the military spectrum be like? Yeah, Trump has also expressed support for regime change in Iran, and that would almost certainly require a large-scale military operation.

7:43The president has been very aggressive about using the military in the second term, but they've been mostly quick one-and-done strikes. The current U.S. force appears to have the capability to bomb for weeks or even longer, but we should stress the U.S. force is built on fighter jets that would strike from the sky and Navy ships that would fire long distance from the seas. What you don't see are large numbers of U.S. ground troops. And with no prospect of a ground war, Iran's leaders seem to believe they could survive a U.S. bombing campaign. I spoke with Alex Vatanka at the Middle East Institute here in Washington.

8:22The boots on the ground option is not being taken very seriously in Tehran, which means the U.S. can hurt them badly, but it's not going to be sufficient and last long enough to question the regime's ability to stay in power, which means you get hit hard, you're bloodied, but you will rise again and you move on. Greg, we've been watching the military buildup, but at the same time, would it be fair to say we haven't been hearing any case from the president as to why the U.S. should go to war? Yeah, that's really accurate. And this has been a very different approach than we've seen from other presidents in the run-up to wars.

9:00Trump, for example, hasn't made a major speech to the American people about the prospect for a new Middle East war, though his State of the Union address is on Tuesday. His administration hasn't sought support from Congress or made the case at the United Nations. And aside from Israel, the president hasn't sought to bring in U.S. allies or build an international coalition. Another key point, the president has been intentionally vague about his ultimate goal. Some days it sounds like the aim is a nuclear deal. Other times the emphasis seems to be on ousting Iran's theocratic leaders. And here's Greg Meir, thanks so much.

9:37Sure thing, Scott.

9:44In men's ice hockey yesterday, the U.S. beat Slovakia and now advances to a gold medal final with Canada tomorrow. In the history of Olympic men's ice hockey, no country has won more gold medals than Canada. And no one has won more silver medals than the U.S. Ha! Tomorrow, Team USA hopes to change that storyline. NPR sports correspondent Becky Sullivan will be at the game and joins us now. Becky, thanks for being with us. Of course. Good morning, Scott. So biggest game in history or merely of the century? Good question. Yeah, I mean, obviously, it's absolutely massive. This is exactly what I think probably everybody was hoping for coming into this Olympic Games.

10:27And I think, you know, the last game I can recall that is this big was, of course, the 2010 Olympic final. that was in Vancouver between Canada and the U.S. Just an amazing overtime thriller where the young Sidney Crosby scored the golden goal to win it for Canada. And yeah, no hockey game has come even close to ratings since then for that game. So it's been 16 years since we've had a game like this. I expect tens and tens of millions, if not more people to tune in. It should be really, really amazing. And this year, NHL players playing for the first time in more than a decade, right? Exactly, yeah.

10:59They haven't played since 2014 in Sochi. And, you know, so the U.S. and Canada, these two rosters are stacked with stars who just haven't ever gotten a chance to play. They're the two best teams in the tournament. All of them were hoping for this. Here's how the U.S. winger and star Matthew Kachuk put it last night. This is the pinnacle of the sport. This is as good as it gets and a rivalry that's as good as it gets. Boy, he's right. Look, you've been watching these two teams all week. One looks stronger than the other? You know, it's hard to say, Scott. I think both have looked great at their peaks.

11:32I'll say this for Canada. They've had two nail-biter elimination games in a row, the first against Czechia in the quarterfinals, then again yesterday in the semifinals versus Finland. And in both games, they were down a goal in the third period. Yet, honestly, even when they were trailing, I felt like it was inevitable. It felt like the whole arena felt like it was inevitable that they would keep their chances alive because their top line is insane. Connor McDavid, he's the best player in hockey. Next to him, Nathan McKinnon, who this season is the NHL's top goal scorer. Next to them, Macklin Celebrini, 19 years old, easily the best young player in the league.

12:04When those three guys are on the ice at the same time, I mean, it's just like it's madness. And so, you know, one of them has the puck, another one has the puck. It just feels like it's going to happen. That's what happened yesterday with less than a minute left to play in that tie game against Finland. McDavid passes it to McKinnon, who, of course, scores the goal with like 35 seconds left. And on they go. Meanwhile, the U.S. had a talk about decisive 6-2 win over Slovakia yesterday. So that's the kind of victory you want going into a big game, isn't it? Oh, 100%. Yeah, yeah, exactly. And they also experienced a little bit of the adversity, too, in their own quarterfinal game.

12:39That was against Sweden. That went to overtime. It took defenseman Quinn Hughes to score the game winner in that one. He was the hero. I mean, I think on paper there's definitely a talent gap, right? I mean, there's no Conor McDavid on Team USA. But it does definitely. The Americans have their guys. I think key is going to be Connor Hellebuck. He's the star goaltender. He's been so dominant in the NHL. Last year he was named MVP. That's the first goalie. He was the first goalie to win that award in a decade. Also, I mentioned Quinn Hughes. He's been excellent. And then I think, you know, just another starter name.

13:10That's the captain, Austin Matthews. He's also the captain of the Toronto Maple Leafs. He's been very solid in this tournament, but he hasn't had like a game-breaking moment yet. And I think obviously tomorrow's game would be the perfect time for that. So what do American players tell you? I mean, this has been weighing on these American minds for the past year now, because, Scott, you might remember this time last year, the NHL organized this four-team tournament in lieu of an All-Star game. They called it the Four Nations Face-Off. It featured the U.S., Canada, Sweden, and Finland. And it was just like a smashing success, especially because it took place in the weeks after President Trump's second inauguration.

13:41He was making all these comments at the time about, you know, making Canada the 51st state. He was putting these tariffs on Canada, and it just led to an unbelievable atmosphere when the two teams met. The U.S. and Canada did for the first time in Montreal. You had Canadian fans booing the Star Spangled Banner. There were three fights in the first nine seconds of the game. The U.S. won that first one, but then five days later, they met again for the final in Boston, and it was Canada's turn to win. They had the overtime goal by their biggest star, Connor McDavid, who came through in the clutch.

14:11So obviously, the Americans have been thinking a lot about that since then. They are looking to rewrite the story this time, and it really just should be electric. Boy, it has all the makings, doesn't it? Sure does. So glad you're there for us. And for us, Becky Sullivan in Milan, thanks so much. Of course. You're welcome.

14:32And that's Up First for Saturday, February 21st, 2026. I'm Aisha Roscoe. And I'm Scott Simon. Andy Craig produced today's podcast with help from Dave Mistich and Gabe O 'Connor. Ed McNulty edited, along with Jacob Fenston, Fernando Naro, Rebecca Metzler, Andrew Sussman, and Eric Whitney. Michael Radcliffe is our director. Our technical director is David Greenberg, with engineering support from Simon Laszlo Jansen and Damian Herring. Our senior supervising editor is Shannon Rhodes. E.B. Stone is our executive producer, and our deputy managing editor is Julia Redback. Tomorrow on the Sunday Story, the unlikely comeback of a mid-century filmmaking technology.

15:14And we've got so much more on the radio. To find your local station, you can go to stations.npr.org. And as always, thank you for listening to us. Thank you so much.

15:37Thank you.