Today’s Supreme Court decision saying Trump broke the law on tariffs adds to an argument that the world needs massive constitutional rewrites to make rules clearer and less open to executive abuse.
Japan is considering constitutional change and so is Bangladesh.
Australia needs it to protect free speech.
This is how the people can take back control …not an easy route, to be sure.
Yet Mr Trump is kinda making it easier by his recklessness.
https://ft.pressreader.com/article/281625311756158
14th Feb
Trump tariffs largely unlawful and barely anyone called him out because of rampant cowardice in industry and press
From the Supreme Court doc (Justia):
——-
The Court has long expressed “reluctan[ce] to read into ambiguous statutory text” extraordinary delegations of Congress’s powers. West Virginia v. EPA, 597 U.S. 697, 723 (quoting Utility Air Regulatory Group v. EPA, 573 U.S. 302, 324).
In several cases described as involving “major questions,” the Court has reasoned that “both separation of powers principles and a practical understanding of legislative intent” suggest Congress would not have delegated “highly consequential power” through ambiguous language. Id., at 723–724.
These considerations apply with particular force where, as here, the purported delegation involves the core congressional power of the purse. Congressional practice confirms as much.
When Congress has delegated its tariff powers, it has done so in explicit terms and subject to strict limits.
Trump used Ieepa (most often stylized as IEEPA) — the acronym for the International Emergency Economic Powers Act…to incorrectly boost his personal political power
It’s a United States federal law from 1977 that gives the president broad authority to regulate international economic transactions (like freezing assets, blocking deals, or restricting trade) after declaring a national emergency related to an “unusual and extraordinary threat” from outside the US — typically for sanctions …not everyday trade policy.
The law has been used for decades mainly for things like sanctions on countries (Iran, Russia, North Korea, etc.) or entities.
It became very prominent recently because in 2025, it was invoked to impose very wide-ranging tariffs on imports from many countries (often called “reciprocal” or “fentanyl-related” tariffs), which sparked major legal fights.
Today (February 20, 2026), the US Supreme Court ruled in a 6-3 decision that IEEPA does not authorize the president to impose tariffs — striking down those broad tariff uses as going beyond what the law allows (tariffs are seen as a form of taxation, which is Congress’s domain under the Constitution).
So in short: IEEPA = powerful presidential emergency economic tool, but the Supreme Court just said “not for tariffs.” (Grok)
———
Then this commentary on the “backdrop” mentioned above:
( More to come….see list of change, below).
Illustrative meme:
The list….chatGPT
Here’s an overview of countries and jurisdictions that have recently undertaken, are currently undertaking, or are actively considering constitutional change (either major reforms, new constitutions, or significant amendment processes).
Some are in active implementation (referendums, legislative packages), while others are in planning or review stages:
Active or Recently Completed Constitutional Processes
Kazakhstan — A new constitution is being drafted and will be decided by referendum scheduled for 15 March 2026. The process involves a comprehensive overhaul of the current constitution and major changes in governance structures.
Thailand — A constitutional referendum was held on 8 February 2026 on whether to begin the process of writing a new constitution.
Guinea — A new constitution was approved by referendum on 21 September 2025 to replace the previous constitution and pave the way for civilian elections.
Maldives — A constitutional referendum is scheduled for 4 April 2026 on amendments including election timing and terms. Benin — The National Assembly approved constitutional amendments in late 2025 that extend terms and create a Senate.
Ongoing Reform Processes and Proposals
Nigeria — A major constitutional review process is underway, with more than 80 amendment bills passed by lower house and discussions continuing into 2025–2026 on electoral reforms, federal structures, and governance issues.
El Salvador — Amendments to the constitution were ratified in January 2025 (notably controversial for human rights implications) and have sparked broader debates about constitutional reform.
Bangladesh — Discussions and proposals around constitutional reforms date to 2025, with public and political debate over democratic and institutional changes.
Nicaragua — Recent constitutional amendments (including elimination of dual citizenship) form part of ongoing constitutional restructuring under the Ortega government.
Political-Level Proposals and Considerations
Türkiye — Türkiye’s ruling party is preparing a road map for broader constitutional reform, with ongoing committee work but no final draft yet.
North Macedonia — Political leaders and EU bodies call for constitutional change to meet governance and accession benchmarks, though specific proposals are still under discussion.
Other Relevant Domestic Constitutional Activity (Subnational)
Virginia (USA) — State legislators advanced multiple constitutional amendment proposals in the 2026 session (U.S. states have separate processes from national constitutions).
Note on Broader Context
Many other countries regularly amend their constitutions or are always in constitutionally relevant debates (e.g., Germany, Sweden, Malaysia, South Africa) — but the list above focuses on distinct, newsworthy, or major reform processes in progress or recently concluded (especially referendums and comprehensive rewrite proposals).