What the US Supreme Court–Trump tariff feud means for Kenya

A landmark ruling by the Supreme Court of the United States has reignited trade tensions after it blocked President Donald Trump from imposing sweeping global tariffs under emergency powers — only for the White House to respond days later with a fresh 10% levy, now being adjusted toward a 15% worldwide tariff regime. For export-dependent economies such as Kenya, the fallout could be significant.

Court draws the line — briefly

On 20 February 2026, the Supreme Court ruled 6–3 in Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump that the president had exceeded his authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) when attempting to impose broad global tariffs.

The decision was widely interpreted as a judicial rebuke of executive overreach in trade policy, reinforcing Congress’s central role in setting tariffs. Markets initially welcomed the ruling, viewing it as a stabilising signal for global commerce.

That calm proved short-lived.

Within days, Trump announced a new blanket 10% tariff on imports, later signalling that the measure would be lifted to 15% globally — this time framed as a standard trade action rather than an emergency intervention.

Why Kenya is exposed

Kenya’s economy is tightly linked to external demand, with exports ranging from tea and coffee to horticulture, textiles and manufactured goods. The United States remains a key destination for Kenyan products, particularly under preferential trade frameworks that have historically supported African exporters.

A universal US tariff immediately raises landed costs for Kenyan goods, weakening their competitiveness against suppliers closer to the American market or operating under bilateral trade agreements.

For Kenyan producers already facing higher logistics costs and currency volatility, even a 10–15% tariff can erase margins overnight.

Agriculture is especially vulnerable. Tea, cut flowers and fresh produce operate on thin profit lines, and price sensitivity among US buyers could lead to reduced orders or pressure on Kenyan exporters to absorb the tariff hit.

Ripple effects beyond exports

The impact does not stop at trade flows.

Foreign investment sentiment is also at stake. Kenya has positioned itself as an East African manufacturing and logistics hub, attracting investors seeking access to Western markets. A more protectionist US posture complicates that narrative, potentially slowing capital inflows into export-oriented sectors.

At the macro level, weaker exports could strain Kenya’s current account and place renewed pressure on the shilling, while reduced dollar earnings would make servicing external debt more expensive.

Regional supply chains may also feel the shock, as Kenya acts as a gateway economy for neighbouring landlocked states.

Policy uncertainty returns

The episode underscores a deeper issue: unpredictability.

While the Supreme Court ruling briefly reassured global markets, Trump’s rapid pivot to fresh tariffs highlights how quickly US trade policy can shift. For developing economies, this volatility makes long-term planning difficult.

Kenyan policymakers are now likely to accelerate efforts to diversify export destinations, deepen ties with Asia and the Middle East, and push harder for regional value chains under African trade frameworks.

But such transitions take time — and tariffs bite immediately.

A warning for emerging markets

The Supreme Court–Trump tariff standoff is more than a constitutional clash inside Washington. It is a reminder that political battles in advanced economies can transmit economic shockwaves across continents.

For Kenya, the renewed tariff push threatens export revenues, investor confidence and currency stability — all at a moment when emerging markets are already navigating higher borrowing costs and fragile global demand.

As Washington debates presidential powers, Nairobi must brace for practical consequences.