Law & Courts

Supreme Court Strikes Trump Tariffs in Case Brought by Educational Toy Companies

By Mark Walsh — February 20, 2026 3 min read
Members of the Supreme Court sit for a new group portrait following the addition of Associate Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, at the Supreme Court building in Washington, Oct. 7, 2022. Bottom row, from left, Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor, Associate Justice Clarence Thomas, Chief Justice of the United States John Roberts, Associate Justice Samuel Alito, and Associate Justice Elena Kagan. Top row, from left, Associate Justice Amy Coney Barrett, Associate Justice Neil Gorsuch, Associate Justice Brett Kavanaugh, and Associate Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson.
  • Save to favorites
  • Print

The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday struck down President Donald Trump’s tariff policy, ruling in cases brought by a variety of businesses, including a pair of Chicago-based educational toy companies, that the president exceeded his powers under a federal statute.

In a 6–3 decision issued Feb. 20, the court held that Trump lacked congressional authorization to impose sweeping tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), the 1977 law his administration cited to justify the policy.

Although the education companies’ specific claims were dismissed on jurisdictional grounds, their lawsuit helped produce the broader outcome they sought: invalidating the tariff policy. One company’s name now rests on top of the decision in Learning Resources Inc. v. Trump.

Learning Resources and a related company, hand2mind Inc., based in Vernon Hills, Ill., sell hands-on learning toys focused on STEM learning, computer coding, social-emotional learning, reading, and mathematics.

“The president asserts the extraordinary power to unilaterally impose tariffs of unlimited amount, duration, and scope,” Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote for the majority. “In light of the breadth, history, and constitutional context of that asserted authority, he must identify clear congressional authorization to exercise it.”

But IEEPA “contains no reference to tariffs or duties,” Roberts said. “We hold that IEEPA does not authorize the president to impose tariffs.”

Roberts’ opinion was joined in full or in different parts by Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, Neil M. Gorsuch, Amy Coney Barrett, and Ketanji Brown Jackson.

Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel A. Alito Jr., and Brett M. Kavanaugh dissented.

“The tariffs have generated vigorous policy debates,” Kavanaugh wrote for those three in the principal dissent. “The sole legal question here is whether, under IEEPA, tariffs are a means to ‘regulate … importation.’ Statutory text, history, and precedent demonstrate that the answer is clearly yes: Like quotas and embargoes, tariffs are a traditional and common tool to regulate importation.”

A technical setback for toy companies

Rick Woldenberg, the CEO of Learning Resources and hand2mind, told Education Week last fall that the president’s tariffs “raised the tax rate on our company to the point it was asphyxiating.”

A federal district court in Washington agreed with their arguments and issued an injunction blocking the tariffs only as applied to Learning Resources and hand2mind. Other courts, including one federal appeals court, also ruled against the tariffs in a separate lawsuit by 12 states and a group of other small and medium-sized businesses that includes a wine importer, a plumbing-supply company, a women’s cycling-wear brand, and a specialty sportfishing-gear company.

The Supreme Court, in its ruling Friday, decided the issue but sent the educational companies’ case back to the federal district court to be dismissed for “lack of jurisdiction.” The Trump administration had argued that their case should have been filed in the U.S. Court of International Trade, where the companion case, also decided by the Supreme Court, had been filed.

But Learning Resources and hand2mind achieved their goal of eliminating Trump’s tariffs.

“The court adopted the arguments that we made in our original complaint,” Woldenberg said in an interview. “I feel very vindicated by that.”

The fact that the court technically ordered his companies’ challenge dismissed doesn’t lessen the victory of the policies being struck down, he said.

Woldenberg said he was especially proud of his companies’ role in the education industry, and that “our industry did this and played a role in this history.”

Kavanaugh, in his dissent, said the court’s decision may not prevent Trump from imposing similar tariffs based on other congressional authorities, something his administration said he was likely to do.

Trump, speaking from the White House press briefing room Friday afternoon, called the decision “deeply disappointing” and said, “I’m ashamed of certain members of the court, absolutely ashamed for not having the courage to do what’s right for our country.”

“They’re very unpatriotic and disloyal to our Constitution,” Trump said, apparently referring to all those in the majority.

Referring to the two of his three appointees who were in the majority—Gorsuch and Barrett, the president said the decision “was an embarrassment to their families, if you want to know the truth.” (He heaped praise on his other appointee, Kavanaugh, as well as on the other dissenters.)

“We have numerous other ways” to impose tariffs, Trump said, adding that some of those other means would be instigated right away.

This story will be updated.

Events

This content is provided by our sponsor. It is not written by and does not necessarily reflect the views of Education Week's editorial staff.
Sponsor
Professional Development Webinar
Grow Leaders, Keep Teachers: Leadership Development as a Staffing Strategy
Find out how to turn leadership development into a staffing strategy and grow your next generation of school leaders from within.
Content provided by Frontline Education
This content is provided by our sponsor. It is not written by and does not necessarily reflect the views of Education Week's editorial staff.
Sponsor
Teaching Webinar
Closing the Practice Gap: Essential Insights for Leaders
Three instructional experts will share strategies for making students’ reading and math practice more engaging and impactful this year.
Content provided by Renaissance
This content is provided by our sponsor. It is not written by and does not necessarily reflect the views of Education Week's editorial staff.
Sponsor
School & District Management Webinar
The Principal's Role in Collective Efficacy and Student Outcomes
Learn practical strategies that help principals translate their confidence into stronger collective teacher efficacy and student outcomes.
Content provided by Otus

EdWeek Top School Jobs

Teacher Jobs
Search over ten thousand teaching jobs nationwide — elementary, middle, high school and more.
View Jobs
Principal Jobs
Find hundreds of jobs for principals, assistant principals, and other school leadership roles.
View Jobs
Administrator Jobs
Over a thousand district-level jobs: superintendents, directors, more.
View Jobs
Support Staff Jobs
Search thousands of jobs, from paraprofessionals to counselors and more.
View Jobs

Read Next

Law & Courts Teens Drop Lawsuit Against Trump's Trans Sports Order After Supreme Court Ruling
The Supreme Court last month upheld state bans on transgender girls in school sports.
4 min read
Two teens challenging New Hampshire's new law banning transgender girls from girls' sports teams, Parker Tirrell, third from left, and Iris Turmelle, sixth from left, pose with their families and attorneys in Concord, N.H., Aug. 19, 2024.
Parker Tirrell, third from left, and Iris Turmelle, sixth from left, pose with their families and attorneys in Concord, N.H., Aug. 19, 2024. The teens initially sued over New Hampshire's law banning transgender girls from school sports teams, and later expanded their lawsuit to challenge President Donald Trump's February 2025 executive order threatening to withhold federal funds from schools that allow transgender girls to join girls' sports teams. They've since withdrawn the legal challenge following a Supreme Court ruling allowing states to ban transgender girls from sports under Title IX.
Holly Ramer/AP
Law & Courts What Schools Need to Know About the Supreme Court’s Transgender Sports Ruling
The justices upheld two state laws that bar transgender girls from participating in female sports.
10 min read
A group prays outside of the Supreme Court ahead of the court's ruling on whether transgender girls and women can play on school athletic teams, on June 30, 2026, on Capitol Hill in Washington.
A group prays outside of the U.S. Supreme Court ahead of the court's ruling on whether transgender girls and women can play on school athletic teams, on June 30, 2026, in Washington. The court upheld two state laws barring transgender girls from joining girls' school sports teams.
Jose Luis Magana/AP
Law & Courts Judge Voids Trump Admin. Rule Excluding Education From ‘Professional’ Degrees
A judge ruled the agency didn't have the authority to adopt such a narrow definition.
4 min read
Graduates in the School of Education hold up books as their degrees are conferred during Harvard's 371st Commencement, on May 26, 2022, in Cambridge, Mass.
Graduates in the School of Education hold up books during Harvard's 371st Commencement on May 26, 2022, in Cambridge, Mass. The Trump administration excluded education fields when it set a definition of "professional" degree to implement a new law instituting graduate student borrowing limits.
Mary Schwalm/AP
Law & Courts Opinion How State Courts Are Quietly Shaping U.S. Education
In education, the real action is often at the state level, not in Washington, explains Derek Black.
8 min read
The United States Capitol building as a bookcase filled with red, white, and blue policy books in a Washington DC landscape.
Luca D'Urbino for Education Week