Trump strikes a calmer tone toward Supreme Court justices during his State of the Union, days after angrily attacking a ruling that struck down his global tariffs.
 |
Donald Trump speaks during a State of the Union address in the House Chamber of the U.S. Capitol in Washington, DC, on Tuesday, February 24, 2026. Photo by Daniel Heuer/Bloomberg/Getty Images |
President Donald Trump adopted a noticeably restrained tone toward the US Supreme Court during his State of the Union address on Tuesday, dialing back his rhetoric just days after angrily condemning the justices who struck down much of his signature global tariff policy.
Speaking before a joint session of Congress, Trump described the court’s 6–3 ruling against his tariffs as “very unfortunate” and “disappointing,” language that stood in sharp contrast to the blistering attacks he had launched publicly after the decision was handed down on Friday. Four justices who participated in the ruling were seated in the chamber, listening silently from the front row.
The moment underscored the delicate balance Trump sought to strike in an address watched by millions: defending a core element of his economic agenda while avoiding a direct confrontation with the nation’s highest court in its presence. In doing so, Trump softens Supreme Court criticism at State of the Union, at least in tone, even as he made clear he strongly disagreed with the outcome.
The Supreme Court’s decision to invalidate most of Trump’s sweeping global tariffs marked a significant setback for a policy that has defined his approach to trade across two terms. The ruling drew an immediate and furious response from the president, who labeled the justices who voted against him as “fools,” “lapdogs,” and “disloyal to our Constitution” in remarks delivered outside the formal setting of the chamber.
That outburst fueled intense speculation ahead of Tuesday’s address. Observers questioned whether Trump would repeat those attacks directly to the justices’ faces or attempt to project a more statesmanlike posture in the nationally televised event.
Ultimately, Trump chose the latter. While he criticized the ruling, he avoided personal insults and did not single out individual justices by name during the speech. The justices present — John Roberts, Elena Kagan, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett — remained expressionless as the president spoke.
The contrast between Trump’s measured words on Tuesday and his earlier rhetoric was striking. After the ruling, Trump had accused the majority of undermining American sovereignty and betraying working-class voters, framing the decision as an attack on his broader effort to reshape global trade.
The majority that struck down the tariffs included Roberts, Kagan, and Barrett. Trump later praised Kavanaugh, who authored the principal dissent, calling him his “new hero” for opposing the ruling.
Despite that uneven praise, Trump greeted all four justices politely as he entered the chamber, shaking hands and exchanging brief words on his way to the podium. The interaction was formal and restrained, devoid of the warmth or pointed commentary that has characterized some of Trump’s past encounters with the court.
The subdued exchange marked a departure from Trump’s interaction with the court during his State of the Union a year earlier. At that time, after completing his speech, Trump turned toward Chief Justice Roberts, thanked him publicly, and added, “Won’t forget it.”
That moment sparked widespread speculation that Trump was alluding to a landmark Supreme Court ruling that granted presidents broad immunity from prosecution for official acts. The court had issued that decision months earlier, reshaping the legal boundaries of presidential power and shielding Trump from potential criminal exposure tied to actions taken while in office.
This year, no such moment unfolded. Instead, the interaction between Trump and the justices was marked by formality and distance, reflecting the heightened tension created by the tariff ruling.
Roberts, Kagan, Kavanaugh, and Barrett have been among the more regular Supreme Court attendees at presidential addresses to Congress. All four were present for Trump’s speech last year, as they have been for several previous State of the Union addresses delivered by different presidents.
Their presence underscores the unique position Supreme Court justices occupy during such events. While they are not required to attend, their appearance carries symbolic weight, placing the judicial branch physically alongside the legislative and executive branches in a rare moment of shared constitutional ceremony.
At the same time, tradition holds that justices refrain from reacting visibly to the president’s remarks, even when those remarks touch directly on court decisions. On Tuesday, that convention held firm.
Even in its restrained form, Trump’s remarks marked a relatively rare instance of a president criticizing the Supreme Court during a State of the Union address. Such moments are uncommon, reflecting long-standing norms intended to preserve the appearance of independence and mutual respect among the branches of government.
One of the most notable precedents occurred in 2010, when then-President Barack Obama used his State of the Union to criticize the court’s Citizens United ruling, accusing it of overturning a century of campaign finance law and opening the door to excessive corporate influence in elections.
That episode produced an unusually visible reaction from the bench. Justice Samuel Alito shook his head and appeared to mouth the words “not true” as Democratic lawmakers standing behind the justices applauded Obama’s remarks. Alito has not attended a State of the Union since.
The memory of that confrontation continues to shape how presidents approach judicial criticism in the chamber, adding weight to Trump’s decision to temper his language this year.
Trump’s choice to soften his tone did not signal retreat from his broader argument. Throughout the speech, he maintained that his tariff agenda was essential to restoring American manufacturing and protecting domestic workers from unfair competition. He vowed to pursue alternative legal pathways to reimpose tariffs, insisting that the court’s ruling would not deter his efforts.
Yet by avoiding personal attacks on the justices during the address, Trump appeared mindful of the institutional setting and the political risks of escalating a public clash with the judiciary at such a moment.
In that sense, Trump softens Supreme Court criticism at State of the Union not by abandoning his position, but by recalibrating how and where he chooses to fight.
The shift in tone also reflected broader political considerations. With midterm elections approaching, Trump faces the task of energizing his base without alienating moderate voters who may be uneasy about open conflict between the branches of government.
Directly attacking Supreme Court justices on live television could have reinforced Democratic arguments that Trump disrespects democratic norms and constitutional boundaries. By contrast, measured criticism allowed him to register his disagreement while maintaining the image of presidential restraint.
Republican lawmakers in the chamber applauded Trump’s defense of his trade policies, while Democrats largely remained silent during that portion of the speech, suggesting the president had chosen language that limited opportunities for dramatic confrontation.
The court’s quiet presence
For the justices themselves, the evening passed without incident. They listened, expressionless, as Trump referenced the ruling and moved on to other topics, including the economy, immigration, and national security.
Their silence underscored the judiciary’s role as an institution that speaks primarily through its decisions rather than through public debate. While Trump’s comments added to the political context surrounding the tariff ruling, they did not alter the legal reality shaped by the court’s decision.
Trump’s relationship with the Supreme Court has been marked by both dependence and friction. He appointed Kavanaugh and Barrett during his first term, cementing a conservative majority that delivered several rulings favorable to his agenda. At the same time, recent decisions — including the tariff case — have shown that the court is willing to constrain presidential power, even when doing so angers the president who helped shape it.
Tuesday’s address reflected that complexity. Trump neither embraced the court nor openly challenged its legitimacy from the House floor. Instead, he chose a middle path, criticizing the outcome while respecting the setting.
As the election season intensifies and Trump continues to push policies that test the boundaries of executive authority, future encounters between the president and the judiciary are likely. For now, Trump softens Supreme Court criticism at State of the Union, offering a momentary pause in a relationship that remains politically and constitutionally fraught.
