Farms.com Home   Ag Industry News

U.S. ag groups react to Supreme Court tariff decision

U.S. ag groups react to Supreme Court tariff decision
Feb 20, 2026
By Diego Flammini
Assistant Editor, North American Content, Farms.com

The Supreme Court ruled President Trump exceeded his authority

Reaction from American ag industry groups is trickling in after the Supreme Court made its ruling about President Trump’s tariffs.

To recap, on Feb. 20 the highest court in the U.S. ruled 6-3 that President Trump didn’t have tariff power under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA).

“We hold that IEEPA does not authorize the President to impose tariffs,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in the decision.

It was under IEEPA President Trump placed fentanyl tariffs on Canada, Mexico, and China, and tariffs on countries that import Russian oil, or export oil to Cuba, for example.

With the Supreme Court’s decision, many of the administration’s tariffs are eliminated.

Here’s what U.S. farm groups are saying about the court’s ruling.

Farmers for Free Trade called the court’s decision a step towards restoring predictability and restoring the rule of law in American trade policy.

“The focus now must be on restoring stable trade relationships and expanding market access for American agricultural products, not finding new ways to harm farmers with tariffs,” Executive Director Brian Kuehl said in a statement.

The American Soybean Association (ASA) says in a time of high input costs, trade policies need to support farmers.

“Moving forward, certainty and dependable market access are essential for U.S. soy to remain competitive globally,” Scott Metzger, president of the ASA, said in a statement. “Because farmers are caught in a cost-price squeeze and ag input costs remain high, we urge the President to refrain from imposing tariffs on agricultural inputs using other authorities.”

The International Fresh Produce Association also responded to the court’s decision.

Tariffs should be targeted, not all encompassing, the organization said.

“While targeted tariffs can be a tool for addressing inequities between trading partners, the broad application of this blunt instrument can disrupt markets, raise consumer costs, and place unnecessary strain on growers and producers across the supply chain,” the organization said, adding that the court decision helps restore predictability.

 


Trending Video

Comparing the Economics of No-Till, Strip-Till & Conventional Systems

Video: Comparing the Economics of No-Till, Strip-Till & Conventional Systems

Conservation Ag Update, brought to you by Bio-Till Cover Crops, Univ. of Illinois analysts dive into new data from the Precision Conservation Management program, comparing the economic differences between no-till, strip-till and other tillage systems.

Plus, we head to Washington County, Wis., for an update on two farmers who dealt with historic flooding over the summer. Blake Basse credits strip-till and cover crops for helping his cash crops survive the “1,000-year” rain event, while Ross Bishop says his no-till fields are more resilient than his neighbor’s conventional fields.