Trump's Global Tariff Strategy: Muhammed Examines the February 24 Trade Shift

The trade landscape shifted dramatically following President Trump’s announcement of a new 10% global tariff on all imports, effective February 24, 2026. Trade policy analyst Muhammed has been closely tracking how this strategic move responds to the Supreme Court’s earlier ruling, offering fresh perspective on what the tariff architecture means for markets and investors.

The Legal Framework Behind Section 122

Just hours after the Supreme Court blocked Trump’s invocation of “emergency” tariff authority with a 6-3 decision, the administration unveiled an alternative pathway. Rather than conceding defeat, the President activated Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 as the legal foundation for the new tariff structure. Muhammed notes that this provision permits temporary import surcharges of up to 15% for 150 days, ostensibly to address balance-of-payments deficits—a different legal lever entirely from the emergency powers the court rejected.

The 10% levy represents an additive measure, layering on top of existing duties affecting steel, aluminum, and Chinese technology products. Muhammed points out that certain exemptions provide some relief: critical minerals, energy products, and select fertilizers received carve-outs, while Canada and Mexico maintain temporary relief under existing North American trade agreements. The new duties take force at 12:01 AM ET on Tuesday, February 24.

Market Response and Bitcoin’s Position

The crypto market has shown cautious reaction to these twin developments. Bitcoin initially surged toward $68,000 following the Supreme Court victory, but as tariff uncertainty crystallized, the asset settled around $67,300. Updated pricing now reflects ongoing macro turbulence, with BTC trading near $65,590 as of late February. Muhammed’s analysis suggests the tariff framework introduces a fresh layer of volatility, as investors weigh geopolitical trade tensions against traditional safe-haven considerations.

The market remains in watchful mode, balancing the court’s affirmation of constitutional limits on executive power against the administration’s demonstrated willingness to pursue alternative legal pathways for trade policy implementation. Muhammed anticipates that the coming weeks will reveal whether this tariff structure withstands legal challenge or generates further economic friction among trading partners.