The U.S. Supreme Court issued a series of rulings in 2026 that curtailed presidential authority, including invalidating tariffs imposed under emergency powers and voiding an executive order on birthright citizenship. The Court also rejected President Donald Trump's bid to summarily fire Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook.

In Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump on February 20, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that all tariffs imposed by the President under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) were invalid. The decision established that Trump did not have the right to impose wide-ranging tariffs on imports under the IEEPA.

The Court voided a Trump executive order that would have restricted birthright citizenship. This ruling followed previous coverage indicating the Court had reviewed the order on 14th Amendment citizenship.

While the Court rejected the bid to remove Governor Lisa Cook, it allowed a president to fire members of purportedly independent government agencies. This decision overturned a 90-year precedent that had limited the ability of presidents to fire leaders of agencies that Congress designed to be independent.

A Gallup poll conducted in July 2026 found that 33% of Americans approve of the job the Supreme Court is doing. The same poll found that 61% disapprove of the job the Supreme Court is doing. Gallup surveyed 1,200 adults by telephone from July 1 through July 19, 2026.

Democrats largely describe the Supreme Court’s ideology as conservative. Republicans tend to describe the Supreme Court’s ideology as middle of the road. A Pew Research Center survey found that 67% of Democrats say the Supreme Court is conservative, compared with 19% of Republicans.

Approval ratings have shifted among party lines. Gallup data shows that Republican approval of the Supreme Court dropped to 58% from 79% in September 2025. Currently, 12% of Democrats approve of the job the Supreme Court is doing, according to a Gallup poll.

Questions of power distribution also divide the public. According to a Pew Research Center survey, 56% of Americans say the Supreme Court has the right amount of power. However, 32% say the Supreme Court has too much power, according to the same survey.

Age correlates with views of the Court. According to a Pew Research Center survey, 56% of adults under 50 view the Supreme Court unfavorably, while 41% view it favorably. In contrast, 50% of adults aged 50 and older have a favorable opinion of the Supreme Court, while 48% have an unfavorable one, according to a Pew Research Center survey.

Education levels also play a role. According to a Pew Research Center survey, 56% of Americans with a college degree or more view the Supreme Court negatively, compared with 51% of those without a degree. Among Democrats, 29% with some college or less education view the Supreme Court favorably, compared with 19% of Democrats with at least a bachelor’s degree, according to a Pew Research Center survey.

Expectations regarding political neutrality remain high. According to a Pew Research Center survey conducted in August 2025, 86% said Supreme Court justices should not bring their political views into decision-making. Only 12% said Supreme Court justices should bring their political views into decision-making, according to the same survey.

Partisan agreement exists on this standard. According to a Pew Research Center survey conducted in August 2025, 87% of Democrats and 87% of Republicans said the justices should not bring personal politics into decisions. However, perceptions of performance lag behind these expectations.

According to a Pew Research Center survey conducted in August 2025, 14% said the justices do an excellent or good job of keeping politics out of decision-making. In contrast, 56% said the justices do an only fair or poor job of keeping politics out of decision-making, according to the same survey.

Legislative responses to Court rulings may follow. A bill to prohibit the imposition of duties on the importation of goods under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act was sponsored by Rep. DelBene, Suzan K. [D-WA-1]. The latest action on the bill was referral to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall.

These rulings define the boundaries of executive power and the independence of federal agencies. The invalidation of tariffs under the IEEPA and the protection of Governor Lisa Cook's position limit presidential authority in economic and administrative matters. However, the allowance of firing leaders of independent agencies overturns long-standing precedent.

Public trust in the institution appears strained despite these checks on power. With a majority holding an unfavorable view and partisan divides in perception, the Court's role and ideology are subject to public discussion. The disparity between the high expectation for non-political decision-making and the low ratings for keeping politics out of decisions shows a challenge for the Court's public standing.