Court ruling on tariffs, Trump’s response fuel market uncertainty for US grains, beef in Commodity News 24/02/2026 Trade policy tensions after the US Supreme Court struck down President Donald Trump’s country-specific tariffs and the president’s decision to implement a 10% global tariff have raised concerns among participants in the US grains and beef markets. In a 6-3 decision, justices said broad tariffs imposed under the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA, were beyond the president’s legal authority. The court’s majority held that only Congress has clear constitutional authority to impose tariffs, and that the emergency-powers law cited by the administration did not grant the executive branch the authority to impose extensive import duties. In response to the ruling, Trump announced he would sign an order on Feb. 20 to implement a temporary 10% global tariff under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, a separate statute that allows the executive branch to impose short-term duties to address trade imbalances. The proposed measure would replace the broader tariffs struck down by the court and could remain in effect for up to 150 days. The administration also indicated it may explore additional trade actions under other authorities, signaling that tariff policy remains uncertain despite the Supreme Court’s decision. Agricultural markets faced uncertainty, as participants assessed whether alternative trade statutes could be used to reinstate tariffs. While the ruling limits the administration’s use of emergency powers, it does not eliminate other tariff authorities, leaving exporters, importers and commodity traders in a wait-and-see mode. The lack of clarity over potential next steps, including possible appeals, new legal pathways or trade responses from key partners, heightened concerns about volatility across grains and feed ingredients, market participants said Feb. 20. Trade tensions spark volatility in grain markets Sentiment in the grains market turned cautious as participants weighed the risk of retaliation or disrupted trade flows. A US-based broker said the overall theme was uncertainty, warning that the environment is “bad for grain” if trade tensions escalate. Tariffs could be revived under a different statute, according to the broker. The US-based broker pointed to soybeans, suggesting that if China decided to cancel a cargo shipment due to the situation, the market reaction could trigger a sudden price break. When asked whether feed ingredient markets such as corn and distillers dried grains with solubles would feel the impact, the broker responded, “Yes. Big time,” adding that they expect a broader market correction or trade disruptions. Beyond price implications, the broker also mentioned the possibility that some countries might seek repayment or concessions tied to previously collected duties. The broker was skeptical that such requests would succeed. They also expressed concern that approving broad payouts or trade concessions would carry political consequences, arguing it would deepen domestic tensions. According to a source in the FOB Gulf market of corn, soybean meal and DDGS, there will be days of volatility that will be favorable for the traders. “I think we’ll definitely see some near-term volatility as some of these tariffs unwind, which is great — volatility makes traders trade!” the source said. Another source in the grains export market said that “Everyone is extremely defensive right