On January 20, 2026, Beijing time, the U.S. Supreme Court has yet to make a ruling on the challenge to the legality of the global tariffs imposed by the Trump administration, effectively hitting the procedural "pause button," which unexpectedly triggered a chain reaction in the financial markets. During the same period, the cryptocurrency market experienced a sudden plunge, with Bitcoin briefly dropping below $90,000, a 24-hour decline of approximately 3.34%. Ethereum also fell below $3,000, with a maximum 24-hour drop of about 6.73%. Amidst the widespread decline of mainstream cryptocurrencies, leveraged funds were particularly hard hit, with approximately $186 million in liquidations across the network in the past hour. In the context of the Supreme Court not providing answers and the uncertain outlook for tariffs, macroeconomic uncertainty was rapidly amplified and reflected in risk assets. The cryptocurrency market reacted fiercely by "re-pricing" significantly in advance of potential trade friction escalation and global liquidity fluctuations, presenting a tense pattern where the policy vacuum and price shocks mutually reinforced each other.
Supreme Court Hits the Pause Button: Global Tariffs Hanging in the Air
The currently unresolved case revolves around the so-called "global tariffs" measures proposed by the Trump administration. The core controversy is not only whether the imposition of tariffs on certain economies complies with U.S. domestic law and international commitments but also entangles long-standing frictions between the U.S. and Europe regarding agricultural subsidies, food safety, and regulatory standards. In related statements, the EU's stance on agriculture and regulation was viewed by Trump's trade team as one of the reasons to redesign the tariff framework, and the Greenland issue was also included in the negotiation context, further enhancing the "globalization" symbolic meaning of this tariff tool.
It is important to emphasize that the current status of the Supreme Court is merely not having made a ruling, providing neither substantive support for this global tariff framework nor a clear rejection of its legality. Procedurally, this means that the existing legal and policy disputes remain unresolved, and the boundaries between executive and judicial powers have yet to be redefined. Due to the lack of a clear "yes or no," relevant parties cannot adjust their negotiation positions or trade arrangements accordingly, and businesses and markets cannot calibrate their expectations for the future tariff environment.
This delay in ruling has extended the "uncertainty period" at the legal and policy levels. From corporate decision-making to cross-border capital flows, all medium- to long-term planning related to imports and exports, supply chains, and cost structures must be made on an incomplete "tariff price list." For the financial markets, any significant case linked to the global trade order that enters "delay mode" will be amplified into a persistent, hard-to-hedge institutional noise in risk pricing, which is precisely the soil where highly volatile assets like cryptocurrencies are most easily used to vent emotions and hedge against expected changes.
Tariff Clouds Loom: Bitcoin's $90,000 Defense Line Breached
As tariff uncertainty intensified, Bitcoin became one of the first mainstream risk assets to provide a sharp price response. According to HTX market data, on January 20, 2026, Bitcoin briefly fell below the $90,000 threshold, with a 24-hour decline of approximately 3.34%. The high-level consolidation range built over several days was quickly breached, and the technical support levels appeared vulnerable under the macroeconomic headwinds. For bullish funds accustomed to slow upward trends, this seemingly "non-catastrophic" decline, occurring below a key psychological price point, had a far greater emotional impact than the numbers themselves.
In contrast, Ethereum's pullback was even more severe. Concurrent data indicated that Ethereum briefly fell below the $3,000 mark, with a maximum 24-hour drop of about 6.73%. As the core asset of smart contracts and on-chain ecosystems, Ethereum often exhibits a higher beta attribute during risk preference shifts, and this time was no exception. After Bitcoin weakened first, Ethereum and other mainstream tokens showed a clear correlated decline, with panic disrupting the rebalancing of funds between sectors, forcing bulls to simultaneously reduce their positions, creating a chain reaction.
More damaging was the concentrated liquidation at the leveraged level. Coinglass data showed that within the concentrated time window of the price fluctuations, approximately $186 million in liquidations occurred across the network in the past hour, including many short-term bullish positions that had chased the highs. When prices quickly fell below key thresholds, automatic liquidations and passive reduction programs compounded, amplifying the instantaneous selling pressure. The negative expectations that could have been digested over time were condensed into a brief but intense liquidation due to the leveraged structure, with the tariff clouds and price plunge coinciding, giving the market a more intuitive sense of the combined risk of "macro changes + structural fragility."
From Greenland Threats to U.S.-EU Frictions: Symbols and Realities of Trade Games
In the narrative of this round of tariff disputes, the name Greenland has been mentioned multiple times. According to public reports, U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer commented that Trump's tariff threats regarding Greenland were seen as a way to "properly use tariffs." This statement is not about the actual economic significance of Greenland but rather its symbolic meaning—tariffs are framed as a bargaining chip that can be flexibly used in geopolitical negotiations, rather than merely a traditional tool for correcting trade deficits. This symbolic usage allows the market to more clearly perceive that tariffs can be raised or withdrawn at any time, no longer just an economic policy but also part of political language.
Correspondingly, there are long-standing differences between the U.S. and EU in areas such as agricultural subsidies, food safety standards, and environmental and regulatory frameworks. Descriptions from multiple media outlets indicate that even when some agreements reach a phased progress in individual texts, the two sides still struggle to fully align on key policy orientations. Such structural differences will not disappear due to a single meeting or statement; instead, they become the background music for each round of tariff friction and negotiation games. For market participants, any strong signals released by either the U.S. or EU could be interpreted as a prelude to a new round of trade conflict.
Under this macro narrative, investors naturally link escalating trade tensions with the re-pricing of risk assets. Among traditional assets, export-oriented companies and cyclical industries are the first to feel the pressure. In an environment where global liquidity and risk aversion intertwine, cryptocurrencies are often viewed by some funds as an alternative asset to hedge against fiat currency and systemic risks. However, when tariffs are seen as a negotiating weapon that could escalate at any time, macroeconomic uncertainty surges, leading funds to prefer to reduce overall risk exposure in the short term. This results in the "risk-hedging narrative" not fully materializing before prices have already begun to adjust downward under selling pressure. The strengthening of the symbolic meaning of tariffs, combined with the realities of U.S.-EU frictions, has caused the cryptocurrency market to experience a round of intense volatility even before the arrival of actual policy implementation.
Market Countdown: Leveraged Testing in the Policy Vacuum
During the phase when the Supreme Court has yet to reach a conclusion, the entire market is effectively in a state of "countdown waiting." In the absence of a clear ruling and specific tariff parameters, spot funds tend to adopt a wait-and-see approach, while more aggressive traders turn to derivatives, leveraging bets on macro directions. In the futures and options markets, various hypotheses surrounding potential tariff escalations, global growth slowdowns, and changes in U.S. dollar liquidity are quickly transformed into long and short positions. These bets appear to be predictions of macro paths but are essentially a game of others' emotions and expected distributions.
In the scenario where tariff expectations may escalate, cryptocurrencies simultaneously carry two contradictory narratives. On one hand, they are viewed by some participants as tools to hedge against risks in the traditional financial system and fiat currency credit risks; if trade tensions trigger expectations of monetary easing, cryptocurrencies could even benefit. On the other hand, they are known for their high volatility and leverage, making them prime candidates for funds to prioritize reducing positions during the initial stages of risk contraction. Therefore, when the direction of tariffs remains unclear and there is a lack of consensus on monetary policy prospects, the market can easily switch back and forth between the labels of "safe-haven assets" and "risk assets," resulting in price performance that exhibits amplified volatility.
Combining the aforementioned approximately $186 million in liquidations over the past hour, it is evident that the long-short game has significantly amplified volatility through the leveraged structure at this stage. A large number of high-leverage positions concentrated near key price points, and once prices deviated slightly from mainstream expectations, the forced liquidation mechanism would programmatically amplify volatility, further squeezing out passive liquidity. Market makers and institutions, upon triggering risk management parameters, were forced to narrow bid-ask spreads and sizes, leading to a deep short-term contraction, making the same scale of market sell orders capable of creating larger price gaps. Thus, the policy vacuum resulting from the Supreme Court's indecision, intertwined with the high-leverage betting in the derivatives market, magnified what could have been a mild digestion of macro uncertainty into a sudden shock capable of breaching key price levels.
Regulation and Narrative Intertwined: The Repeated Pull of Trump's Strategy
Looking back at the trade strategies of the Trump administration, it is evident that tariffs have always been frequently used as negotiation tools. This tactical logic is not complex: by threatening or actually imposing tariffs, greater bargaining space is sought for subsequent negotiations or to showcase a "tough stance" in domestic political narratives. Because tariffs are embedded in political and electoral cycles, their frequency and rhythm are often difficult to simply derive from economic fundamentals, and this uncertainty repeatedly influences the overall risk appetite of the market—under optimistic expectations, tariffs are seen as short-term pressure tools, and the market tends to bet that "there will be a compromise before a breakdown"; under prevailing pessimism, the same tariff threats are interpreted as signals of a long-term confrontational pattern.
In the current dispute over the legality of global tariffs, it is necessary to distinguish between publicly available, verifiable facts and policy directions that are still in the rumor or verification stage. Public facts include: the Trump administration promoted a set of measures framed around global tariffs and had significant differences with the EU in areas such as agriculture and regulation; as of January 20, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court has not ruled on their legality; and the market has thus generated significant divergence regarding the future tariff environment. What remains unknown includes the specific considerations within the Supreme Court, the timing of the final ruling, and how the executive branch would adjust policies if the ruling changes the current tariff framework. For the latter, there are currently no clear answers from official texts, nor is it advisable to substitute market rumors for the facts themselves.
Therefore, when interpreting the "Trump card," investors need to be cautious about treating unimplemented assumptions as established realities. A more prudent approach is to continuously monitor future publicly available texts related to tariffs—including any formally released tariff adjustment plans, trade negotiation updates, and subsequent written opinions from the Supreme Court. Each authoritative document could trigger a re-pricing of market expectations, whether correcting or reinforcing existing trends, and this will be rapidly amplified in a market like cryptocurrencies that is highly sensitive to emotions. Under the intertwining of tariff narratives and regulatory processes, what truly affects prices is often not the "rumors themselves," but the moment those rumors are either disproven or confirmed.
The Eye of the Storm Before the Ruling: How the Cryptocurrency Market Positions Itself
Against the backdrop of the unresolved legality of global tariffs, the recent drop of Bitcoin below $90,000 and Ethereum below $3,000, accompanied by approximately $186 million in liquidations over the past hour, is not an isolated event. The causal chain can be roughly outlined as follows: the Supreme Court's delay in ruling pushes tariffs and global trade prospects into a longer period of uncertainty; the market adjusts its macro risk premium accordingly, becoming more cautious about growth and liquidity expectations; under the dual contraction of emotions and expectations, the high-volatility segment of cryptocurrencies becomes a priority outlet for risk adjustment, while the high-leverage structure of the derivatives market compresses what should have been a gradual price adjustment into a rapid pullback and concentrated liquidations. This chain is not a linear causation but is sufficient to illustrate how policy uncertainty transmits to on-chain prices through emotions and structural dynamics.
Before the Supreme Court provides a ruling and the specific details of Trump's tariff path and rates are clarified, the market is likely to maintain a state of "high volatility + narrative repetition." New information, even if it is just a change in wording, can be amplified as a catalyst for emotions, leading to significant price swings within a single day or even an hour. For the cryptocurrency market, this means that traditional trend judgments become more difficult, with narrative-driven factors temporarily overshadowing fundamentals or on-chain data, making prices resemble an "emotional pendulum" swinging between different expectations.
In an environment of incomplete information, controlling leverage and managing rhythm may be more critical than predicting direction. For ordinary investors, it is important to be cautious when using high leverage, especially to avoid opening positions concentrated around major macro events, to prevent being passively drawn into liquidation chains when expectations and actual outcomes are still unclear; to moderately reduce overall position volatility, combining position management with a macro event calendar, and reserving enough cash or low-volatility assets to buffer against sudden fluctuations; and to maintain continuous tracking of macro developments and official texts, correcting existing judgments with updated facts rather than being led by short-term price movements. Before the ruling, the cryptocurrency market may find it difficult to completely escape the "eye of the storm," but with stricter risk management and clearer narrative discernment, individual investors still have the opportunity to safeguard their safety boundaries amid intense volatility.
Join our community to discuss and become stronger together!
Official Telegram community: https://t.me/aicoincn
AiCoin Chinese Twitter: https://x.com/AiCoinzh
OKX Benefits Group: https://aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=l61eM4owQ
Binance Benefits Group: https://aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=ynr7d1P6Z
免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。
