Bessent Says Supreme Court Unlikely To Block Trump Tariffs
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said it is “very unlikely” the Supreme Court will overturn President Donald Trump’s use of emergency powers to impose tariffs, with a ruling possibly coming as soon as this week.
“I believe that it is very unlikely that the Supreme Court will overrule a president’s signature economic policy,” Bessent said during an appearance on Meet the Press. “They did not overrule Obamacare. I believe that the Supreme Court does not want to create chaos.”
Last month, the Supreme Court upheld a key provision of the Affordable Care Act that allows a federal panel to recommend preventive services insurers must cover at no cost to patients.
Bessent’s remarks came one day after Trump announced plans to impose a new round of tariffs on European goods until what he described as “a Deal is reached for the Complete and Total purchase of Greenland.”
Trump did not specify which statute he is invoking, though the move mirrors prior “liberation day” tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA.
Trump said tariffs on goods from Denmark, Norway, Sweden, France, Germany, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, and Finland will begin at 10 percent on Feb. 1 and rise to 25 percent on June 1.
He argued that only the United States has the resources and strategic reach to secure the island and counter growing geopolitical threats in the Arctic.
“We have subsidized Denmark, and all of the Countries of the European Union, and others, for many years by not charging them Tariffs, or any other forms of remuneration,” Trump wrote. “Now, after centuries, it is time for Denmark to give back.”
The tariffs will apply not only to Denmark but also to Finland, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, and the United Kingdom, all of which have pledged to deploy military forces to Greenland in support of Danish sovereignty.
Trump said those actions have dangerously escalated tensions.
The Supreme Court is expected to rule before the end of its term on Trump’s use of IEEPA to impose tariffs, though a decision could come this week.
The law grants the president broad authority to deploy economic measures in response to what it defines as an “unusual and extraordinary threat.”
The U.S. government in January ran up a smaller deficit than a year earlier, while tariff collections surged, underscoring how pivotal a long-awaited Supreme Court decision could be to federal fiscal health.
The $30 billion in customs duties collected through tariffs for the month brought the total for the fiscal year to date to $124 billion, which is 304% more than the same time last year.
President Trump first put tariffs on all goods and services coming into the U.S. in April 2025. He also put so-called “reciprocal tariffs” on individual countries. Since then, the White House has been talking to its trading partners and backing off on some of the more aggressive claims while still being tough on issues.
The Supreme Court heard oral arguments last November that questioned the reasons Trump gave for the tariffs. It was thought that the decision would come in January. The high court hasn’t made a decision yet, and the White House is worried that a bad decision could mean the U.S. has to pay back the duties it has already collected.
The tariffs helped slow down the rate at which the budget deficit was growing.
The Treasury Department said that in the fourth month of the fiscal year, the shortfall was about $95 billion. This was about 26% less than the same time last year.
That brought the federal deficit to $697 billion so far this year, which is 17% less than the same time last year, according to numbers that weren’t adjusted for the calendar. Changes to the calendar brought the deficit cut down to 21%.
The $38.6 trillion U.S. debt is still costing the country money in interest. The net interest paid for the month was $76 billion, which was more than all other expenses except for Medicare, Social Security, and health care. This year, gross interest has reached $426.5 billion, up from $392.2 billion last year.
'Guilty Of Fraud' - Hammer Dropped On Former First Lady Jill Biden During Live Fox News Segment
McEnany Accuses Jill Biden Of Misleading Americans About Debate Performance
Posted July 15, 2026
Former White House press secretary and Fox News host Kayleigh McEnany accused former first lady Jill Biden of misleading the American public about President Joe Biden’s condition following his widely criticized debate performance during the 2024 campaign.
McEnany made the remarks Thursday during an appearance on Fox News Channel’s “America’s Newsroom,” where she reacted to comments Jill Biden reportedly made in her upcoming book regarding the president’s performance during the debate that ultimately intensified questions about his age and fitness for office.
The discussion began when co-host Dana Perino referenced remarks Jill Biden made immediately following the debate.
At a campaign event after the debate, Jill Biden praised her husband’s performance.
“Joe, you did such a great job. You answered every question,” she said at the time.
Perino contrasted those comments with more recent claims attributed to Jill Biden and raised questions about the apparent inconsistency.
“So now we know that this is what she’s saying in her book,” Perino said. “And the question I would love to ask her is where are you lying then or now?”
McEnany responded by arguing that Jill Biden’s reaction following the debate was inconsistent with her more recent descriptions of the event.
“It’s a great question,” McEnany said.
“That is not the reaction of someone who believes they just watched their husband have a stroke. It is an absolute lie.”
McEnany then accused the former first lady of concealing concerns about the president’s condition from voters.
“It was fraud,” she said.
“What she did fraud on the American public and she’s continuing it by saying she had never seen him like that before or after.”
The debate between Biden and President Donald Trump became a turning point in the 2024 election cycle, with many Democrats publicly expressing concern about Biden’s performance and his ability to continue his campaign.
Questions about Biden’s age and mental sharpness had circulated for years, but the debate intensified those concerns and fueled calls from some Democrats for him to step aside.
During the Fox News discussion, McEnany referenced comments previously made by veteran journalist Carl Bernstein regarding Biden’s condition behind the scenes.
“Dana, you all remember Carl Bernstein, who said he talked to people who knew Joe Biden, loved Joe Biden, supported Joe Biden, and they were adamant that what we saw was not a one-off,” McEnany said.
According to McEnany, Bernstein reported that individuals close to Biden had observed similar episodes before the debate.
“They said it had happened 15 or 20 times prior, him losing his train of thought,” she said.
McEnany also cited a fundraiser Bernstein reportedly described.
“He described a fundraiser where he froze up and seemed to have some type of rigor mortis,” she said.
“This is not something that was a one-off.”
McEnany argued that concerns about Biden’s condition were widely known among those close to him.
“This was well known,” she said.
She then questioned why Jill Biden continued publicly defending her husband following the debate.
“So why did she keep up with the fraud on the American people?” McEnany asked.
The former first lady has repeatedly defended her husband and rejected claims that she or members of his inner circle concealed concerns about his health, Breitbart News reported.
The debate over Biden’s condition became one of the defining political stories of the 2024 election cycle and continued after he ultimately left the race.
McEnany’s comments reflect ongoing scrutiny surrounding what Biden’s family, advisers and top Democratic officials knew about his condition and when they knew it.
Neither Jill Biden nor representatives for the former president immediately responded to McEnany’s latest remarks.
As new books and accounts from those involved continue to emerge, questions surrounding Biden’s final campaign and the decisions made by those closest to him remain a major topic of political debate.
