The Texan Podcast - Daily Rundown - February 20, 2026

Episode Date: February 20, 2026

Want to support The Texan and help us continue providing the Lone Star State with news you can trust? Subscribe today: https://thetexan.news/subscribe/The Texan’s Daily Rundown brings you a quick recap of the latest stories in Texas politics so you can stay informed with news you can trust.Want more resources? Be sure to visit The Texan and subscribe for complete access to our in-depth articles, subscriber-exclusive newsletters, videos, podcasts, and more.Enjoy what you hear? Be sure to subscribe and leave a review!

Howdy folks, today is Friday, February 20th, and you're listening to The Texans Daily Rundown. I'm the Texans managing editor Rob Lauchess, and here is the rundown of today's news in Texas politics. First up, the Supreme Court of the United States delivered a historic ruling on Friday, holding that sweeping tariffs imposed by President Donald Trump on global trade violate the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, rendering the taxes unlawful. Trump announced the broad tariffs on a variety of countries and industries early in his second term, claiming that he received the power to do so from the IEEPA, which was passed in 77 under President Jimmy Carter. Chief Justice John Roberts delivered the opinion of the court in the case, styled Learning Resources Incorporated versus Trump, and was joined by Justice's Sonia Sotomayor,

Neil Gorsuch, Amy Coney Barrett, Elena Kagan, and Katanji Brown Jackson. Justice Clarence Thomas filed a dissenting opinion, joined by Justice's Brett Kavanaugh and Samuel Alito. In the majority opinion, the court concluded that, as a matter of statutory interpretation, the IEEPA does not authorize the president to unilaterally levy tariffs. The court further held that the U.S. Constitution reserves the power to set tariff policy to Congress. While Kavanaugh wrote in his dissent that the majority holding may still give Trump a narrow path to levy some tariffs, the interim effects of the decision are likely to be a, quote, mess that now requires the administration to refund billions of dollars to importers. In other news, quote, only a lawyer could fail to appreciate the decisive clarity of so simple and useful a word as no, end quote, Texas Supreme Court Chief Justice Jimmy Blacklock wrote in response to a motion for clarification

filed by the State Commission on Judicial Conduct. The Texas Supreme Court issued its answer in January in response to a certified question by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. Quote, does Canon 4A.1 of the Texas Code of Judicial Conduct prohibit judges from publicly refusing, for moral or religious reasons, to perform same-sex weddings while continuing to perform opposite-sex weddings. In October, the High Court also added a comment to the Texas Code of Judicial Conduct that would protect judges based on their sincerely held religious beliefs. The comment states,

quote, it is not a violation of these canons for a judge to publicly refrain from performing a wedding ceremony based on a sincerely held religious belief. The judicial commission appeared to not be satisfied with the added comment, nor the Supreme Court's answer to the certified question, prompting it to file its motion of clarification with the court. Blacklock wrote, quote, I gather from the motion that the commission must believe the court did not carefully read and understand the question certified by the Fifth Circuit.

Rest assured, we did. Last but not least, a state court has ordered the city of Kima to pay related fees after losing multiple appeals in a case alleging city officials revoked a resident's construction permits and prevented her from building on her land for more than four years. Both a district court judge and a state appeals court denied the city's motions to dismiss the lawsuit filed by property owner Veronica Crowe in 2022, but the city's hired attorney,

Bill Helthand of Lewis, Brisbwa, Bisgard, and Smith successfully delayed the suit's progress by repeated requests for extensions and appeals. In December 2025, the Supreme Court of Texas denied Helthens petition for review, allowing the lawsuit to proceed to trial in Galveston County unless settled out of court. Appellate fees billed to the city come to less than $1,000, but taxpayers will also be covering Kima's yet unknown legal costs and possible damages awarded, should Crow prevail at trial. Those fees are not covered by the city's insurance provided by the Texas Municipal League's intergovernmental risk pool,

since the courts have ruled that the city's actions constitute an inverse taking of property. Thanks for listening. To support the Texan, please be sure to visit the texan. News and subscribe to get full access to all of our articles, newsletters, and podcasts.