PBS News Hour

GEOFF BENNETT: Good evening.

I'm Geoff Bennett.

AMNA NAWAZ: And I'm Amna Nawaz.

On the "News Hour" tonight: After the# Supreme Court stri.. Trump's global tariffs, he pledges to keep# most of them in place through other means.

GEOFF BENNETT: In the midst of a military buildup,## the U.S.

considers a limited strike on Iran, but# many fear that too could lead to an all-out war.

AMNA NAWAZ: And the EPA loosens# restrictions on coal-burning power plants,## allowing emissions of hazardous# pollutants, including mercury.

JOHN WALKE, Natural Resources Defense Council:# They claim affordability, but in the fine## print of their own document, they admit that this# repeal will have no impact on electricity prices.

(BREAK) AMNA NAWAZ: Welcome to the "News Hour."

The Supreme Court struck down most# of President Trump's global tariffs## today in a 6-3 decision that is a# major blow to his economic agenda.

GEOFF BENNETT: The court ruled that# President Trump did not have the## authority under a 1977 economic emergency# law to issue such sweeping tariffs.

The president responded forcefully,# using sharp language to criticize the## justices who ruled against him, calling# them unpatriotic and disloyal to the## Constitution.

At a press conference, he# said he would move forward regardless,## vowing to impose a global 10 percent# across-the-board tariff under a different law.

DONALD TRUMP, President of the United# States: The Supreme Court's ruling on## tariffs is deeply disappointing.

And I'm# ashamed of certain members of the court,## absolutely ashamed for not having the# courage to do what's right for our country.

The Democrats on the court are thrilled, but# they will automatically vote no.

They're against## anything that makes America strong, healthy,# and great again.

They also are a, frankly,## disgrace to our nation.

Although I firmly disagree# with the court's holding today, the decision might## not substantially constrain a president's# ability to order tariffs going forward.

That's because numerous other federal statutes,## which is so true, authorize the president# to impose tariffs and might justify most,## if not all, of the tariffs issued in# this case, even more tariffs actually.

GEOFF BENNETT: And we start our# coverage tonight with the "News## Hour"'s Supreme Court analyst and# SCOTUSblog co-founder, Amy Howe.

Amy, it's always good to see you.

I want to read part of the chief justice's opinion# in this case w.. decision to impose the tariffs.

He says in part --# quote -- "The president asserts the extraordinary## power to unilaterally impose tariffs.

In light of# the breadth, history, and constitutional context## of that asserted authority, he must identify# clear congressional authorization to exercise it."

So what are your key takeaways from today's ruling# and this rebuke of the president's approach?

AMY HOWE: So this ruling didn't# come as much of a surprise.

After the oral argument, it seemed like# the Supreme Court was likely to strike## down the tariffs.

The real question was# how many justices would join to strike## the tariffs down and would they be able# to coalesce around a particular rationale?

I think probably from the justices'# perspective it's not a personal rebuke,## as much as it's a legal rebuke.

Under the# court's precedent for the president to## exercise this kind of sweeping power, they're# saying Congress needs to be really clear## before it hands over that power.

And they're# saying, we just don't see it here this time.

GEOFF BENNETT: Well, the president, as we# saw in that press briefing, he attacked the## justices personally and he also criticized# the way they wrote the decision, saying they## invalidated the tariffs, but didn't clarify what# should happen to the revenue already collected.

DONALD TRUMP: I said, well, what happens to all# the money that we took in?

It wasn't discussed.## Wouldn't you think they would have put one# sentence in there saying that keep the money## or don't keep the money, right?

I guess it# has to get litigated for the next two years.

So they write this terrible,# defective decision, totally defective.

GEOFF BENNETT: So, what do you make of that?

And earlier this evening, you# have the governor of Illinoi.. J.B.

Pritzker, demanding a $1,700 refund# per family for the people of his state.

AMY HOWE: The only real reference to it is in## Justice Brett Kavanaugh's opinion# for the three dissenting justices.

The lack of reference to the refunds# is complicated by the fact that the## litigants who were actually before# the Supreme Court in these cases had## been promised immediate refunds by the# federal government if they prevailed,## and it wasn't actually part of the# question before the Supreme Court.

The only question before the Supreme# Court was, does this federal law,## the International Emergency Economic Powers Act,## authorize the tariffs that the president# imposed?

Could the Supreme Court have said## something about the refunds?

Maybe, but it wasn't# entirely surprising that they didn't do it.

GEOFF BENNETT: The way the president attacked# the justices, what does that reveal about## the relationship between the president# and the Supreme Court in this moment?

AMY HOWE: Well, in this moment, clearly, it's not# good.

The Trump administration, particularly on## the court's emergency docket, had been on a# long winning streak in the Supreme Court for## basically all of 2025.

There was something like# 24 straight victories on the emergency docket.

The Trump administration is likely to# prevail in some other important cases## involving executive power, including# the question of whether or not the## president has the power to fire the heads# of independent agencies like the Federal## Trade Commission and the Consumer Product# Safety Commission for any reason at all.

In the past, he has referred to the justices that# he has appointed as my justices.

And so he feels,## I think, betrayed by Justice Neil# Gorsuch and Justice Amy Coney Barrett,## who were in the majority# today and who he appointed.

So I think he feels like the Supreme Court# possibly is there to rubber-stamp his policies,## and, with Justice Barrett and Justice# Gorsuch, perhaps a bit transactional,## that they are there because he appointed# him and they should support him.

GEOFF BENNETT: Amy Howe, thanks,# as always, for your analysis.

AMY HOWE: Thank you.

AMNA NAWAZ: For more on what today's ruling means.. professor of law and finance at Yale University# and president of the Budget Lab at Yale.

Good to see you, Natasha.

So we got this Supreme Court ruling# at 10:00 Easte.. the president had announced a new# slate of tariffs.

Help us understand,## which of the tariffs are now# gone and which are in place?

NATASHA SARIN, President, Budget Lab# at Yale University: So I will say it## is a bit of a whirlwind.

And the nature# of what happened this morning was you## basically had the president having# effectuated across-the-board tariffs## on allies and adversaries like at levels# that we haven't seen in the last century.

The Supreme Court said that about# two-thirds of those tariffs,## the tariffs that had been issued under# this particular authority called IEEPA,## were invalidated as a result of their decision.# And then, as was widely expected, as a result## of a decision like this, the president said he# plans to use other authorities like Section 232## or Section 122 of the Trade Act, in order to# be able to essentially keep in place tariffs## that were at levels that were dismissed# by the Supreme Court earlier this morning.

That's actually a harder thing to do# in practice than you might think having## listened to the president this afternoon# because there are more rules and process## requirements associated with the other# authorities that he's trying to deploy,## which is why his preferred authority was one# that the Supreme Court said simply couldn't## whether the burden of tariffs as broad-based as# those that this administration has pushed for.

AMNA NAWAZ: And you just heard# a little bit about this in the## previous conversation.

What about# those billions in tariff revenue?## Could retailers and manufacturers see some# kind of a refund?

Could consumers as well?

NATASHA SARIN: What's so interesting is that in# oral argument, Justice Amy Coney Barrett said,## won't it be a mess with respect to# trying to think about what to do## with the fact that about $140 billion# of revenue have already come into the## fisc as a result of these tariffs that# were at play in the Supreme Court case?

Just as Amy Coney Barrett ultimately ruled to# invalidate those tariffs, along with the majority,## but Justice Kavanaugh said explicitly,# this is in fact going to be a mess,## recalling her in oral argument.# And the decision says literally## nothing with respect to what is going# to happen with respect to those refunds.

One reason why that really matters to consumers# is a large chunk of those $140 billion that have## already been paid into the fisc as a result# of these tariff levels have actually been## passed through in the form of higher prices.

We# estimate my colleagues and I at Budget Lab that## that cost the average American household# around $2,000 a year in higher prices.

But if there are any refunds, they're going# to go to the firms, the importers of goods.## And so how that ultimately plays out with# respect to the consumers seeing these dollars,## that's an open question.

How these# refunds would even work in practice,## big open question that this# decision says nothing about.

AMNA NAWAZ: Natasha, what about this# new 10 percent global tariff that the## president also announced?

Given# how the Supreme Court just ruled,## does he have the authority to do# that or does he need Congress?

NATASHA SARIN: Part of what I'm worried# about with respect to these alternate## trade authorities is you're almost in# this tariff legal uncertainty doom loop,## where he's effectuating these 10 percent# across-the-board tariffs that were in## place this morning before this decision# landed through this alternative authority.

I'll note that this alternative authority only# gives him the capacity to keep those tariffs in## place for 150 days.

What happens after those 150# days, who's to say?

But even for those 150 days,## does he have the power under this authority# to levy tariffs like this?

It's never been## tried before and it's ultimately# something that is likely to reach## the Supreme Court in some capacity over# the course of the months and years ahead.

And so I think tariff uncertainty# is here with us to stay for quite## some time.

And I suspect this is# not the last time that the highest## court in the land is going to be# weighing in on these questions.

AMNA NAWAZ: You look at the economic# impact of all of these things.

In a minute or so we have left, with the# existing tariffs that are still in place,## with this new 10 percent global tariff, what's# the economic impact you're looking at there?

NATASHA SARIN: So what we know is that# tariffs are at their highest level that## we've seen over the course of the last century.# As a result of today's Supreme Court decision,## tariff rates fell from something like an effective# tariff rate of 16 percent to around 9 percent.

But they rose way back up as a result of# these 10 percent across-the-board tariffs## that the president announced this afternoon# that basically held in place a large chunk## of his existing tariff agenda.

And all that# is to say these are the most inflationary## policies in our lifetimes.

Tariffs# are a tax on the American consumer,## to the tune of several thousand# dollars of increased prices every year.

And at a moment when the American people are# still grappling with post-pandemic inflation,## higher prices for literally everything that they# consume than they remember just a few years ago,## it is striking that we are pursuing# these types of inflationary policies,## and really to no economic end that has been# clearly articulated from this administration.

AMNA NAWAZ: Natasha Sarin, president of the Yale# Budget Lab, thank you so much for your time.

NATASHA SARIN: Thanks so much for having me.

GEOFF BENNETT: And turning now to one# of the plaintiffs from today's case,## that's Rick Woldenberg, owner of the Chicago-based# small toy manufacturer Learning Resources.

Welcome back to the "News# Hour."

Thank you for having me.

Rick, last November you told us your tariff costs# had risen sixfold, more than sixfold, in fact,## in a single year.

So what was your reaction# when you heard the Supreme Court decision today?

RICK WOLDENBERG, CEO, Learning Resources: Well,## obviously, we were very gratified to have# the support of the Supreme Court.

We felt## vindicated in our assertion that the# tax that we were paying was unlawful.

I can also tell you that it was a# demonstration of the rule of law## in action.

And so I was comforted by# the fact that I felt that the court## was impartial and applied the law as# written.

That's important to everybody.

GEOFF BENNETT: The tax, as you# describe it, the added cost,## how much of that did your company absorb and# how much did you have to pass on to customers?

RICK WOLDENBERG: Well, it's# an interesting question.

I took a look at it.

And our tax rate, federal# plus state, plus IEEPA tariffs, .. of 100 percent last year.

And so you can't stay# in business if you make a dollar and you pay more## than a dollar in taxes.

You will eventually# have no dollars.

So we had to pass it on.

And that tells you exactly why other# companies had to pass it on too.

You## can't have a marginal tax rate that is# greater than your earnings.

So we passed## on some of it.

We passed on as little as we# felt we could manage.

And in heading into '26,## we already decided we were going to win# the case.

And so we decided to treat our## financials as if we weren't going to pay# tariffs, and we didn't raise our prices.

So we're actively trying to average our price# down to where we think it would have been.

GEOFF BENNETT: The president today, in# railing against the Supreme Court, announced a## 10 percent global tariff.

So, in practical terms,# what actually changes for your business tomorrow?

RICK WOLDENBERG: Well, at least our tax rate went# down, because most companies -- most countries## were being taxed at 18, 19, or 20 percent.# And when I say the countries were being taxed,## I mean we were being taxed to the# tune of 18 or 19 or 20 percent.

So now, at 10 percent, that's about a reduction# in half.

It didn't go to zero.

And 122,## Section 122 can only impose a tax for five months.# So I guess we will see what happens after that.

GEOFF BENNETT: As we were discussing earlier,# the court in striking down these tariffs didn't## spell out what happens to the revenue already# collected.

What's your hope and expectation?

RICK WOLDENBERG: Well, they did say# that the law does not provide for## tariffs.

So the tariffs were# unlawful when imposed.

That## means that the government took money# from us they had no right to take.

And just like paying too much in taxes, they have# to give it back with interest.

That's what the law## provides.

So it was never anyone's expectation,# I don't think, that the Supreme Court would## fashion a remedy.

They will send it down.# But having -- for the remedy to be created.

But they also said quite clearly these tariffs## were collected unlawfully.

That# means they have to be returned.

GEOFF BENNETT: And lastly, Rick, I'm not sure# if you were watching the press conference with## the president today, but he resorted to# name-calling when talking about you and## the other plaintiffs.

I won't repeat what he# said, harsh language, choice words, to be sure.

I wonder if you have a response to that.

RICK WOLDENBERG: Somebody told me he said# I was good-looking.

He didn't say that?

(LAUGHTER) RICK WOLDENBERG: I don't think that# these issues are solved by pointing## fingers.

And I have not allowed our# case to become political.

So I don't## have to take the position that we are# against an individual like Mr.

Trump.

We were against the misapplication of law, and# that's what we said.

And so I'm not sure that## any reply is necessary.

We are companies# located in Chicago.

We make educational## products that go into schools and homes.

I# don't know why anyone would be angry at us.

GEOFF BENNETT: Rick Woldenberg, owner of the# small toy manufacturer Learning Resources,## thanks again for joining us.

RICK WOLDENBERG: Thank you.

AMNA NAWAZ: ## Today, President Trump suggested he was# considering a limited strike on Iran,## while Iran's foreign minister said he# was drafting a new diplomatic proposal## as part of ongoing negotiations.# The public statements come as the## United States continues to deploy a large# number of military assets in the region.

Nick Schifrin has been following# this all and joins us now.

So, Nick, what did we hear# from the president today?

NICK SCHIFRIN: Well, as you said, Amna, the# president suggested that he was considering## a limited strike on Iran in order to try and# convince Iran to accept a diplomatic deal.

That seems to confirm a report# in The Wall Street Journal,## but he said it with a smile in a chaotic# room.

So let's take a listen to the question,## to the answer, and also what he said about# the nature of the deal this afternoon.

QUESTION: Mr.

President,## are you considering a limited military# strike to pressure Iran into a deal?

WOMAN: Thank you, press.

Thank you, press.

QUESTION: Are you considering# a limited strike, sir?

DONALD TRUMP, President of the United States:# I guess I can say I am considering that.

They better negotiate a fair deal.

NICK SCHIFRIN: President Trump also# said today that Iran's crackdown## of an unprecedented number of protests last# month killed 32,000 people.

That's a number## I have heard some activists use, but the# U.S.

government has never used before today.

But, remember, Amna, the crackdown was what# started this round of threats.

President## Trump warned that, if Iran killed protesters,# he would respond.

Iran crossed that red line## by the thousands.

But other than Starlinks,# the president never enforced his red line.

AMNA NAWAZ: Nick, is it fair to say, with the# president's statement the number of military## assets in the region, the threat, military# threat, has gone up in the last few days?

NICK SCHIFRIN: Yes, I mean, this is one of the# largest deployments to the Middle East in decades.

Let's take a look at the map, and I# want to point out a few things.

You## see the green triangles there.

Those# are the dozens of bases that the U.S.## has access to that Iran is threatening# to target, the red triangles, right,## two carrier strike groups, one south of Iran, the# other entering the Mediterranean sailing east.

And all of those yellow dots, more# than a dozen ships, those can fire## missiles toward Iran, but also contribute# to air defense.

In addition to all of that,## there are dozens of additional fighter jets that# have been deployed to the region.

And officials## tell me all of this gives the president# a range of options for military strikes.

AMNA NAWAZ: What do we know# about what Iran's saying how## they would respond to even a limited strike?

NICK SCHIFRIN: So a regional official told# me and other reporters last night that Iran## would respond to even a limited strike# by walking away from the negotiations.

So the idea of a limited strike producing a better# result in negotiations, he said, was not true.

And## that was echoed by every expert I talked to,# and these experts have a range of opinions.

It was also echoed by Iran's foreign minister,## Abbas Araghchi, speaking# on MS NOW's "Morning Joe."

ABBAS ARAGHCHI, Iranian Foreign Minister# (through translator): Military option would## only complicate this, would only bring about# disastrous consequences, not only for us,## perhaps for the whole region.

If you talk with# the Iranian people with the language of respect,## we respond with the same language.

But if# they talk to us with the language of force,## we will reciprocate with the same language.

NICK SCHIFRIN: Araghchi also said that Iran would# finalize a new offer to the U.S.

for diplomatic## talks in the next two to three days.

But he# said that the U.S.

had not asked Iran to freeze## enrichment or to go down to zero enrichment,# which is the administration's public position.

ABBAS ARAGHCHI: What we are now talking about# is how to make sure that Iran's nuclear program,## including enrichment, is peaceful# and would remain peaceful forever.

NICK SCHIFRIN: A White House official tells# me tonight -- quote -- "Iran cannot have## nuclear weapons or the capacity to build# them and they cannot enrich uranium."

That seems to me, Amna, a declarative statement# against Araghchi's claim.

And, again, all experts## saying right now that it's pointing to some# kind of U.S.

military strike in the near future.

AMNA NAWAZ: All right, Nick# Schifrin, thank you very much.

NICK SCHIFRIN: Thank you.

AMNA NAWAZ: ## We start the day's other headlines with the# latest fallout from the Jeffrey Epstein files.

Police searched the former home# of Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor,## located on the grounds of Windsor Castle west# of London.

The king's brother had lived there## for decades until his eviction earlier# this month.

The search comes a day after## he was arrested on suspicion of misconduct in# public office related to his friendship with## the late convicted sex offender.

The former# prince was released after nearly 11th hours.

Separately, the lobbying firm co-founded by# Peter Mandelson has halted operations.

The former## British ambassador to the U.S.

has come under# increasing pressure due to his ties to Epstein.## And in this country, Bard College in New# York has opened an independent review into## the relationship between Epstein and the# school's longtime president, Leon Botstein.

The Trump administration is requiring all# truckers and bus drivers to take commercial## driving tests in English.

The move was announced# today by Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy,## who said it would get unqualified# drivers off the road and improve safety.

SEAN DUFFY, U.S.

Transportation Secretary: # Just because you're a foreigner,## that doesn't mean that you can't drive a big# rig, you can't drive a truck.

Well, what's## happened, that we have had so many unskilled,# unqualified, untrained drivers on American roads.

AMNA NAWAZ: Many states allow drivers to# take license tests in other languages,## but still require that they# show proficiency in English.## Today's announcement is part of a broader# crackdown on the industry since a fatal## crash last August involving an immigrant driver# who officials say was in the country illegally.

In New York, the largest nursing strike in# decades is close to ending after thousands## of nurses reached a tentative agreement with# management today.

More than 4,000 nurses at New## York Presbyterian Hospital had been on the picket# line for more than a month.

The union says today's## deal includes staffing improvements, a 12 percent# pay raise, and safeguards against the use of A.I.

If approved, nurses could return to work as# early as next week.

They would rejoin the## nearly 11,000 other New York nurses who ratified# contracts with two other hospitals last week.

In Venezuela, opposition groups say a new# amnesty law that could lead to the release## of hundreds of political prisoners does not go# far enough.

Acting President Delcy Rodriguez## signed the measure yesterday.

It signals a# broad shift in policy towards such prisoners,## but has upset some families by excluding# certain groups like detained military members.

Opposition leader Juan Pablo Guanipa had been# under house arrest.

The bill granted his freedom,## but, speaking to reporters, he# warned of a long fight ahead.

JUAN PABLO GUANIPA, Venezuelan Opposition# Leader (through translator): The important## thing is not the law.

The im.. who are outside will be able to return and# that we will be able to have all political## prisoners released.

That is what has to happen.# And that is the pressure that we have to exert.

AMNA NAWAZ: A Venezuela-based# rights group estimates some## 600 people remain in jail for political reasons.

House Speaker Mike Johnson's office denied a# request for the late Reverend Jesse Jackson## to lie in honor in the U.S.

Capitol Rotunda.# Jackson's family and some House Democrats had## filed the request for the civil rights icon,# who died earlier this week at the age of 84.

In rejecting the request, the speaker's office# cited past precedent.

Most recently, a request to## honor slain conservative activist Charlie Kirk was# also denied.

But there have been some exceptions,## including civil rights icon Rosa Parks in# 2005 and the Reverend Billy Graham in 2018.

Even before today's tariff announcement, a pair# of economic reports raised new concerns about## the health of the U.S.

economy.

The Commerce# Department said today that the fourth-quarter## GDP rose just 1.4 percent when compared# to the year before.

That was due largely## to the effects of the government shutdown# and was less than economists had expected.

A separate report showed a vital gauge# on inflation rising 2.9 percent in## December, well above the Fed's# preferred target of 2 percent.

On Wall Street today, stocks posted decent# gains following the Supreme Court's tariff## decision.

The Dow Jones industrial average added# 230 points on the day.

The Nasdaq rose 200 points,## or nearly 1 percent.

The S&P 500# also ended in positive territory.

And tributes have been pouring# in for actor Eric Dane,## the "Grey's Anatomy" star# who passed away yesterday.

ACTRESS: McSteamy, woo-hoo.

ERIC DANE, Actor: Is that what# you call me now, McSteamy?

AMNA NAWAZ: Dane made his first# appearance as plastic surgeon Mark Sloan,## also known as McSteamy, exactly 20# years ago to the day of his passing.## He played that role from 2006 to 2012.# Dane also portrayed the troubled Cal## Jacobs on HBO's "Euphoria," among# other TV and film appearances.

Last April, he announced he'd been diagnosed# with ALS, a progressive disease also known as## Lou Gehrig's disease, and became an# advocate for the illness.

After his## diagnosis, Dane recorded this video message# speaking directly to his teenage daughters.

ERIC DANE: I hope I'm demonstrating that you can# face anything,you can face the end of your days,## you can face hell with dignity.

Fight,# girls, and hold your heads high.

AMNA NAWAZ: In a statement, his family# said -- quote -- "He will be deeply## missed and lovingly always.

"# Eric Dane was 53 years old.

There are just two days of competition left at# the Winter Olympics and the U.S.

is looking to## lock in a few more medals before the Games wrap# up.

There are spoilers ahead, so fair warning;## 31-year-old us skier Alex Ferreira# finally got a gold in the men's free## ski halfpipe.

He's won silver# and bronze in past Olympics.

The U.S.

men's hockey team dominated Slovakia# today, winning 6-2.

They will face archrival## Canada in the gold medal match on Sunday, the# last day of the Games.

U.S.

women's curling## came up short against Switzerland, so they# will vie for the bronze tomorrow.

Looking## at the overall medal count, the U.S.

remains in# second place with 29.

Norway maintains the lead## with 37 medals and with 17 golds broke its own# record for most golds at a single Winter Games.

Still to come on the "News Hour": Wyoming Governor# Mark Gordon discusses key issues facing states in## this politically fraught time; David Brooks and# Jonathan Capehart weigh in on the week's political## headlines; and Palestinians in Gaza observe# Ramadan despite enormous destruction and loss.

The Environmental Protection Agency is scaling# back limits on toxic emissions from coal-burning## power plants, clearing the way for them to# emit more hazardous pollutants like mercury.

Stephanie Sy has more on these changes.

STEPHANIE SY: That's right, Amna.

In a statement today, the EPA said the# deregulatory action will ensure affordable,## dependable energy for American families and# restore American energy dominance.

Public## health advocates are warning that rolling# back limits on mercury and other hazardous## air pollutants would harm human health and# ultimately drive up health care costs too.

To get more on that and the# environmental perspective,## I'm joined by John Walke from the Natural# Resources Defense Counsel, or NRDC.

John, thank you for taking the# time to join the "News Hour."

As you know, the administration can't really# roll back all the mercury restrictions,## which courts have upheld under the# Clean Air Act since 2012, right?

So,## what is the Trump administration doing exactly# and what do you think is the ultimate goal?

JOHN WALKE, Natural Resources Defense Council:# The Trump EPA today rolled back safer limits## on mercury pollution by 70 percent.

They# rolled back safer limits on toxic soot## pollution by two-thirds, and they rolled back# any need for continuous emissions monitors.

They claim affordability, but in the# fine print of their own document,## they admit that this repeal will# have no impact on electricity prices,## and indeed the safer limits and better monitoring# would have had no impact on electricity prices.

STEPHANIE SY: Now, we did ask a representative# with the Trump administration's EPA to join us.## They declined, at least for today,# but they pretty much share the power## industry's perspective on this, which is# that the additional regulations Biden's## EPA put forth were harmful to the# coal industry and energy security.

The head of America's Power# issued a statement today that## stated that -- quote -- "Repealing the 2024# rule helps prevent premature retirements of## coal plants and strengthens grid# reliability at a critical moment."

John, how much of a lifeline does this# rule change give to the coal industry,## which has been on the wane for many years?

And# what are the greater repercussions of that?

JOHN WALKE: No lifeline at all, actually.

EPA, again, in the fine print, found that# this would have no impact on coal plant## retirements.

And the Biden EPA, when it# strengthened the standards, also found it## would have no impact on retirements.

The truth# is that the coal industry has faced headwinds## from competition with cleaner renewable# energy from plants that burn methane gas.

And there has been a steady downward# spiral of electricity generated from## coal over the past decade.

And that will continue## notwithstanding this attack on health# safeguards and clean air protections.

STEPHANIE SY: We have seen the# Trump administration strip away## greenhouse gas emission limits as well.# But what makes this EPA rule different,## from what I understand, John, is,# this directly impacts human health?

Remind us what the science tells us about exposure# to mercury, its impacts on the human body,## particularly babies and developing fetuses,# and what you see as truly at stake here.

JOHN WALKE: What's at stake is more mercury# emissions that are a brain poison.

And they## poison and harm the developing brains# of the fetus, of young children,## babies, children all the way# up to 12 or later, actually.

So it is causing learning deficiencies.# It is causing I.Q.

lost.

And that's in## addition to all the other health hazards from# rolling back the toxic soot pollution limit,## which contributes to cancer and birth defects# and infertility, miscarriages and much more.

STEPHANIE SY: You mentioned that the amendments# put forth by the Biden administration included## a requirement for so-called continuous# emissions monitoring at power plants.## That goes away with this rule change under# Trump.

Talk about the significance of that.

JOHN WALKE: I was even floored by this# when I read EPA's documents today.

They admit in the fine print that# eliminating a continuous emissions## monitor at a coal plant -- and there are# about 200 in the United States -- will## save that coal plant $14,000.

Now,# coal plants and coal companies in## this country have revenues of tens# to hundreds of billions of dollars.

And they are saving coal plants $14,000# per year for each monitor.

The truth is## that Americans would have gotten# far more benefit and transparency## from requiring continuous monitors that# show hourly emissions of toxic pollution,## which in turn drives better reductions# in pollution and better compliance.

The Trump administration wanted to eliminate# all of those goods in order to save $14,000.

STEPHANIE SY: That is John Walke with the NRDC.

John, thank you for joining us.

JOHN WALKE: Thank you, Stephanie.

GEOFF BENNETT: President Donald Trump# welcomed both Democratic and Republican## governors to the White House this# morning for a bipartisan meeting.

As that gathering was under way, the U.S.# Supreme Court handed down its major ruling## on tariffs, a decision that could affect# a number of states, including Wyoming,## where trade and energy production play# an important role in the state's economy.

Wyoming's Republican Governor Mark Gordon attended## the morning's gathering of# governors, and joins us now.

Thanks for being here.

GOV.

MARK GORDON (R-WY): Wonderful# to be .. GEOFF BENNETT: I want to start with# trade, since the Supreme Court,## as you know, struck down the# administration's tariffs.

Well, how does that decision change the# outlook for Wyoming producers and exporters,## especially ranchers, energy companies,# for instance, that rely on global markets?

GOV.

MARK GORDON: Well, I# think that's a good question.

What I would say is that we had already started# some work with Japan and other countries in Asia## to talk about getting our natural gas off the# West Coast, be able to get our coal off the West## Coast.

It's not really clear to us exactly# how this trade decision will change that.

I think Japan, for example, was very# high -- Governor Lujan Grisham and I## were in Japan last year, and they were# very high on the notion of being able## to buy American energy.

We hope this continues,# and that trade deficit is able to be decreased.

GEOFF BENNETT: Well, what are you# hearing from industry in your state?

GOV.

MARK GORDON: We were all# beginning to adjust to it.

GEOFF BENNETT: Right.

GOV.

MARK GORDON: Our ability to -- first# of.. Our concerns were domestic consumers.# The market has been really quite good.

As far as energy is concerned, our interest# is being able to get that offshore.## We have tremendous amounts of energy, and# we're really looking at A.I.

as being a## boon to us.

So we're going to adapt# kind of however it comes best for us.

Right now, it's a little# hard to know if it's going## to change our manufacturing, any of that stuff.

GEOFF BENNETT: On energy, President Trump# pledged to expand domestic energy production.## What specifically has the administration delivered# for Wyoming, and where do you still want action?

GOV.

MARK GORDON: Well, I think# we're very excited about this## administration, because we are not# constraining what we can produce.

So we have -- Wyoming's a powerhouse.# We have tremendous amounts of fossil## fuel.

We have led the nation on carbon# capture and other things that can make## sure that we can both address climate# issues and produce more energy, energy## that's available and can be produced easily.# We have tremendous resources of wind and solar.

And then we have also built up our nuclear# industry.

TerraPower and BWXT are both## doing work in Wyoming now.

So we're very# excited about this administration kind## of opening that up.

There's those# legacy pieces that we're working## through.

The last administration had put some# constraints on some of our ability to develop,## and we're hoping that those can# be done away with fairly quickly.

GEOFF BENNETT: Let's talk about that,# because there's news on environmental## regulation today too.

The administration# announced it's rolling back some clean## air regulations for power plants, including# limits on mercury and hazardous air toxins.

Wyoming has taken steps to regulate methane# and wildlife conservation.

So how do you## balance environmental stewardship# with economic competitiveness?

GOV.

MARK GORDON: Well, I think one of the# most important things for Wyoming has been,## if we do it locally, we have stakeholder# engagement.

The people that work in the## energy business are also hunters.

They love the# outdoors.

They love taking their family fishing.

So they care a lot about what we're able to# do, which is why we have tried to balance## how we develop our energy in a way that# preserves our migratory game pathways,## makes sure that our sage grass# populations are protected.

And the state has done that.

And it# has done it very successfully.

I think,## when we look at what we can do, as# opposed to telling us what we can't do,## and we say we want to balance environmental# protection with development, we don't want## to hold back the energy this nation needs,# I think you look at the people who can solve## those problems on the ground, and this# administration has allowed us to do that.

GEOFF BENNETT: Why do you think this has# been controversial at the federal level,## where it seems like you found a# strategy for success in the state level?

GOV.

MARK GORDON: Yes, I# -- that's a good question.

You look at the results that we have and,# generally speaking, people are saying, gosh,## that's working with sage grass, that's working# with migratory game animals.

There may be just## this notion that Washington can cure everything.# If we do it here, we can make it happen elsewhere.

But the real resistance I have to that is that# we have private property interspaced with state## and federal lands.

And when you try to impose the# federal will on that, you don't have stakeholder## engagement, you don't have stakeholder belief# in the outcome, and that's the difference.

GEOFF BENNETT: Wyoming is one of# the most reliably Republican states## in the country.

Does that free# you up to govern pragmatically?

GOV.

MARK GORDON: Yes, I think it does.

I think what Wyoming is really focused# on is sensible solutions to making sure## that we can still power our nation.# We were the nation's first national## park.

that's deep in our DNA.

And so I think# what it has given us is the ability to kind## of work carefully with property owners# and others to find the best solutions.

We have worked also with Democrat administrations# as well.

And I think one of the friendships that I## treasure most is my relationship with Governor# Lujan Grisham.

We both are energy states.## We are not going to agree on everything, but we# realize that together we can probably do a better## job of representing what's important# to America, if we do work together.

GEOFF BENNETT: Wyoming Governor# Mark Gordon, thanks for coming in.

GOV.

MARK GORDON: Thanks so much.

GEOFF BENNETT: ## The Supreme Court's tariff# ruling and President Trump's## response topped off a week that saw key# developments on the international stage.

For more, we turn now to the analysis# of Brooks and Capehart.

That's David## Brooks of "The Atlantic" and# Jonathan Capehart of MS NOW.

Good evening to you both.

So, David, we will start with you.

Jonathan, feel free to#take a sip of water if you need it.

The key takeaways of this#Supreme Court tariff ruling, as you see them.

DAVID BROOKS: Well, it'll# make tariff-issuing harder,## certainly will not make them go away.# Trump has made that perfectly clear.

But just on the substance of it, it's become# clear that this tariff policy is a gigantic## economic failure.

It was designed to reduce --# to increase manufacturing jobs in the United## States.

Manufacturing jobs have continued# their decline, maybe at an accelerated rate.

At the same time, according to a Fed study this# week, 90 percent of the costs are passed on to## American consumers.

So it's a tax on Americans.# And then it's -- so it's led to inflation.

But the big picture here is that the Supreme# Court has had a pretty consistent line on## federal power.

They have given Trump# a lot of broad latitude to run the## executive branch.

But they have not given him# broad latitude to run the legislative branch.

They have said this is a clear legislative thing.## It's in the Constitution, taxing and# spending, tariffs.

It's right there.## And they're trying to draw a line around the# presidency.

Back in like 1973-'74, a historian## named Arthur Schlesinger wrote a book called# "The Imperial Presidency" about Richard Nixon.

That wasn't even close to where we# are today.

This is the most imperial## presidency in American history.

And the# worst part is, it's accompanied not only## by a president who wants to grab every power, but# a Congress whose power is imploding voluntarily.

And so part of the problem here is the# unwillingness of Congress to do their job.## And that leaves a vacuum that Trump can fill.

GEOFF BENNETT: Jonathan, what about that?

President Trump has for years now pushed the.. term and in the first year of his second term.# How significant is it, after years of the Supreme## Court really reinforcing his expansive view of# executive power, two of the justices he appointed## effectively broke with him today?

JONATHAN CAPEHART: It's a good sign## that the Supreme Court isn't as in lockstep# with the president as a lot of people feared.

The other thing -- excuse me -- never swallow just## before -- your own saliva just# before you go.

My apologies.

(LAUGHTER) JONATHAN CAPEHAR.. the justices basically said in the# ruling, you know, Mr.

President,## there is a way to do what you want to do.

And# it's by doing it with the legislative branch.

So as much as it was a smackdown of the president# and his overreach, it was a reminder to Congress## that basically, yo, you guys have a job to do.# The Constitution lays it out.

Get to work.

Whether## this Congress, with this Republican majority# and particularly with this Republican speaker,## whether they will take the Supreme Court up on# its opportunity to do its job remains to be seen.

GEOFF BENNETT: Well, after the ruling,## the president took to the White House# Briefing Room.

H.. and he escalated his attacks against# the court and the justices themselves.

DONALD TRUMP, President of the United# States: The Supreme Court's ruling on## tariffs is deeply disappointing.

And I'm# ashamed of certain members of the court,## absolutely ashamed for not having the# courage to do what's right for our country.

They're very unpatriotic and# disloyal to our Constitution.

GEOFF BENNETT: Disloyal to our Constitution.# Is there a point at which the president's## rhetoric -- maybe we're already there --# becomes corrosive to the institution itself?

DAVID BROOKS: Well, Donald Trump has# never had an honest disagreement with## somebody and where you say, oh, I disagree# with you and without him going ad hominem.

And that is just his nature.

It is the# nature of somebody with a narcissistic## personality disorder to think, I am the# center, and everything that's an assault## on me cannot be anything but a shameful# attack on all that is right and good.

And so it's very hard.

We travel around the# country.

We meet people trying to heal America,## trying to build conversations.

And it's just# frustrating that all these people are doing## this work around the country at the same time,# day by day, there's a shredding from the top.

And so there's these forces of humanization# that are trying to have a decent country,## and then the shredding from the top is just# a constant battle of forcing dehumanization.

GEOFF BENNETT: As we have been speaking,# the president signed the executive order## establishing this 10 percent global tariff.

It# expires in 150 days unless Congress extends it.

Does that though, Jonathan, set up a trap for# Republicans in Congress, given how unpopular## tariffs are?

They're certainly going to be# pressured by President Trump to fall in line.

JONATHAN CAPEHART: And they're going to# be pressured by Democrats who want to## do something about the president's tariff regime.

So, yes, they're in a trap, they're# in a quandary, they're in a bind,## just as they are in a trap, in a# quandary, in a bind.

Let's not forget,## there's still a partial government shutdown.# And we haven't heard -- at least I haven't## heard anything about any kind of negotiations# to reopen the Department of Homeland Security.

And on the president's remarks, going# after the Supreme Court, the same Supreme## Court that gave him immunity for official# acts, and he was all happy about them then.## But of all the shameful remarks he gave in that# press conference, when he said not only that he## thought that those justices should be ashamed,# but that their families would be ashamed of them,## and that, to me, just -- just when I thought# he couldn't get any lower, he gets lower.

And I don't know why I keep thinking he# won't go any lower, but he does.

But that,## I thought, was really shameful# on the part of the president.

GEOFF BENNETT: Let's shift our focus to the# president convening this past week the first## meeting of what he's calling his Board of# Peace, dozens of international leaders,## you see them there, discussing ongoing conflicts,# including Gaza, the rising tensions with Iran.

David, we have spoken on this program about U.S.# retrenchment.

Is this a reassertion of American## leadership, or do you see this as executive# overreach in the foreign policy sphere?

DAVID BROOKS: Yes, it's not ideal what he's doing.

And I'd say it's not ideal for a couple of# reasons.

One, there's really no recipe for## how you're going to get Hamas to disarm.# And unless you do that, there's going to## be no investment.

And so unless you have a# strategy for that, you really don't have a plan.

Second, there's not enough Palestinian input# there.

This is their place and eventually,## we hope, their country.

And they should be## beginning the redevelopment of their# own country with outside assistance.

Nonetheless, I think this is worth a shot.# I think America has led international## development programs for all through the 20th# century.

And some of them worked and some of## them didn't.

But I don't see anything# else on offer to get Gaza some aid.

The U.N.

has totally morally bankrupted# itself in that region.

They're not going## to do anything.

They don't have the trust# of the Israelis, let alone other people.## And they shouldn't have our trust, at least# on this issue.

I'm not a big U.N.

ambassador,## but, on the Middle East, they have# sacrificed their moral authority.

And so I don't see anybody else doing it.

And# so if Trump wants to lead an international## coalition to do international development in# Gaza, I don't see anything better on offer.

JONATHAN CAPEHART: Here's my question, though.

In event of an opportunity to# ask the president questions,## this is what I would ask him, Mr.# President, two-part question.

One,## where is the $10 billion you committed yesterday?# Where's that money coming from?

And, two,## into which bank is it -- offshore bank is it going# to, a bank that you, as the leader of this board,## gets to decide where this money goes# and you decide how that money is spent?

Why shouldn't the American people think# that the money that you are using,## taxpayers' money, isn't going to end up# in your own pocket or the pocket of your## family and not make it to Gaza?

That is# the question that I would love to ask.

GEOFF BENNETT: In the time that remains, I want to# get your reflections on Jesse Jackson, the civil## rights icon, two-time presidential candidate# who passed this past week at the age of 84.

JONATHAN CAPEHART: Reverend# Jackson, a historic figure.

And I think of it in terms of what Ambassador# Young said to me in an interview years ago,## that Reverend Dr.

King said to them,# most of us won't live until 40,## but if we live past 40, we will make it to 100.

And he felt an obligation if he lived past# 40.

Reverend Jackson ran for president the## first time when he was 42 years old.

And# ever since that first run in '84 and '88,## he's been -- and you could see it in his works,# an obligation to try to make the nation better.

And I think he did.

GEOFF BENNETT: David?

DAVID BROOKS: I bega.. and Jesse Jackson, his Rainbow Coalition was# there.

Harold Washington was mayor of the time,## a great politician, Jackson, a great rhetorician.

And those two were sort of rivals because they# were very sort of different kinds of people.

But think of it.

Jackson was# instrumental to the civil rights movement,## but he also really was a formative influence# on the modern American progressive movement.

And so he did two big things in# his life.

And that's -- aside from## his nice personality and his rhetorical# style, that's a life of accomplishment.

GEOFF BENNETT: David Brooks, Jonathan Capehart,## always great to speak with# you.

Have a good weekend.

AMNA NAWAZ: ## The holy month of Ramadan is celebrated# by over 1.5 billion Muslims around the## world.

For Palestinians in Gaza, Ramadan is# defined by hope amid destruction and loss.

We were able to speak with people in Gaza, in part# with the help of our "News Hour" videographer and## producer Shams Odeh, to get a closer feel# for their celebrations and their sorrows.

Bright lanterns line the stalls of this bustling# Al-Zawiya Market in the heart of Gaza's Old City,## marking the beginning of Ramadan, a stark contrast# to the great destruction just beyond the corridor.

The market is one of Gaza's oldest, more than# 700 years old.

Part of it was destroyed in an## Israeli airstrike in November of 2024.

The# Ramadan staples sold here, from dates to## olives and decorations, have been centerpieces# for the Muslim holy month for generations.

This is the first Ramadan since the# cease-fire between Israel and Hamas## in October, though Israeli strikes have# killed more than 600 Palestinians since.

ENAS OMAR, Ramadan Shopper (through# translator): This market is one of## Gaza's oldest, despite the destruction and# despite the war that has come to Gaza.

We## still rebuilt much of it and brought# back the lively Ramadan atmosphere.

AMNA NAWAZ: During this month,# Muslims fast from sunrise to## sunset and immerse themselves# in religious practices.

But,## this year, the high cost of living and# the shadow of the war have taken a toll.

Shopkeepers like Louay Al-Jamasi# know this all too well.

LOUAY AL-JAMASI, Shopkeeper (through# translator): People have been deprived## of Ramadan decorations today because they don't.. high because goods have not been allowed to# enter.

This lantern is now double the price.

AMNA NAWAZ: Saeed Al-Saqqa has been selling# pickles at the market for 20 years.

This year,## he says the vibrant Ramadan# atmosphere is also heavy with grief.

SAEED AL-SAQQA, Shopkeeper (through# translator): We are working hard to## restore our smiles here and bring Ramadan back# to its celebratory form.

But the pain remains.

I mean, Ramadan comes and you have lost# most of your family members, your neighbors,## your friends and your relatives.

So# Ramadan comes with the taste of loss.

AMNA NAWAZ: Families that once filled# multiroom houses with laughter and## feasts in the holy month now# live in eerily quiet tents.

For Amal Al-Samri and her# children, this is now home.

AMAL AL-SAMRI, Displaced Palestinian# (through translator): Before the war,## life was beautiful, we used to visit .. would go down to the market to shop for# the house and prepare for Ramadan.

Today,## there's nothing.

We are living in tragedy.

AMNA NAWAZ: Outside the tents, children# infuse their bleak surroundings with color.

ABDULRAHMAN ABU JAHL, Volunteer (through# translator): Decorating for Ramadan creates## room for joy, even if it's simple.

Of course,# today we are talking about children in Gaza,## whose survival is a success story# internationally.

We want them to## experience happiness and dreams to# welcome the holy month of Ramadan.

AMNA NAWAZ: Their artwork a defiant hope on# display for all to see.

Another sunset brings## another day of fasting to an end in a Ramadan ripe# with reflection, but this year also resilience.

GEOFF BENNETT: Be sure to watch "Washington# Week With The Atlantic" tonight here on PBS## for a look ahead to President Trump's# State of the Union address next week.

AMNA NAWAZ: And on "Compass Points" this weekend,## Nick Schifrin and his panel assess# China's latest military moves.

GEOFF BENNETT: And, on "Horizons," William# Brangham explores the importance of## exercise.

You can find those programs on our# YouTube page and on your local PBS station.

Well, that is the "News Hour"# for tonight.

I'm Geoff Bennett.

AMNA NAWAZ: And I'm Amna Nawaz.

On behalf of the entire "News Hour" team, thank#..