Top-ranked Canada heartbroken after upset loss to Sweden in women's curling at the Olympics

CORTINA D'AMPEZZO, Italy (AP) — The top-ranked Canadian women couldn't overcome “straighter” ice and a sharp Sweden squad, and now the country's controversial men’s team will have the curling power’s last chance at Olympic gold at the Milan Cortina Games.

With Canada already shut out of the mixed team event medals, Rachel Homan's team was upset by Anna Hasselborg’s Sweden in the semifinals Friday.

“They’re heartbroken right now,” Canada coach Heather Nedohin said.

Sweden, ranked No. 12, will face Switzerland for gold on Sunday.

Sweden, which has won the women’s competition three times since curling returned to the Olympic program in 1998, beat Canada 6-3.

Homan had beaten Hasselborg in all three of their previous meetings this season.

"I woke up this morning and just told the girls, ‘I really believe we’re winning today,’” Hasselborg said, with one of her children in her arms and another playing at her feet.

Silvana Tirinzoni’s Switzerland beat the United States 7-4 and will be aiming for their first women’s gold at the Olympics.

The Swiss took silver behind Canada at the last two world championships after four straight golds in the biggest curling competition outside of the Olympics.

Canada will play the U.S. for bronze on Saturday.

“Obviously disappointed, but our work is not done here,” Homan said. “We’re going to come out fighting tomorrow.”

The Canadians said they struggled with “straighter” ice that “made some shots quite a bit tougher.

“But Sweden played a great game and kudos to them,” Homan said.

U.S. vice skip Cory Thiesse, who already won silver in the team event with Korey Dropkin, said she was a little surprised to be facing Canada for bronze.

“They’re the No. 1 ranked team in the world. But it’s the Olympics and that pressure is hard sometimes and you just never know,” Thiesse said. “Our motto this week has just been to keep games close and you never know what is going to happen out there.”

In the men’s competition, Canada faces Britain for gold on Saturday, while Norway was playing Switzerland for bronze later Friday.

The Canadian men were the subject of a controversy that got attention far beyond the ice when several players were accused of double-touching the rock, a rules violation.

AP Olympics: https://apnews.com/hub/milan-cortina-2026-winter-olympics

Sweden's Anna Hasselborg reacts during a women's curling semifinal match against Canada, at the 2026 Winter Olympics, in Cortina d'Ampezzo, Italy, Friday, Feb. 20, 2026. (AP Photo/Misper Apawu)

United States' Tara Peterson looks on during a women's curling semifinal match against Switzerland, at the 2026 Winter Olympics, in Cortina d'Ampezzo, Italy, Friday, Feb. 20, 2026. (AP Photo/Misper Apawu)

Switzerland's Silvana Tirinzoni, center, and Selina Witschonke celebrate winning a women's curling semifinal match against the United States, at the 2026 Winter Olympics, in Cortina d'Ampezzo, Italy, Friday, Feb. 20, 2026. (AP Photo/Fatima Shbair)

Sweden's Anna Hasselborg, Sara McManus, Sofia Scharback, Agnes Knochenhauer celebrate winning a women's curling semifinal match against Canada at the 2026 Winter Olympics, in Cortina d'Ampezzo, Italy, Friday, Feb. 20, 2026. (AP Photo/Fatima Shbair)

Canada's Rachel Homan leaves following a women's curling semifinal match against Sweden at the 2026 Winter Olympics, in Cortina d'Ampezzo, Italy, Friday, Feb. 20, 2026. (AP Photo/Fatima Shbair)

United States' Tabitha Peterson competes during a women's curling semifinal match against Switzerland, at the 2026 Winter Olympics, in Cortina d'Ampezzo, Italy, Friday, Feb. 20, 2026. (AP Photo/Fatima Shbair)

Switzerland's Carole Howald reacts during a women's curling semifinal match against the United States, at the 2026 Winter Olympics, in Cortina d'Ampezzo, Italy, Friday, Feb. 20, 2026. (AP Photo/Fatima Shbair)

Canada's Rachel Homan in action during a women's curling semifinal match against Sweden, at the 2026 Winter Olympics, in Cortina d'Ampezzo, Italy, Friday, Feb. 20, 2026. (AP Photo/Misper Apawu)

Sweden's Sara McManus, right, and Sofia Scharback compete, during a women's curling semifinal match against at the 2026 Winter Olympics, in Cortina d'Ampezzo, Italy, Friday, Feb. 20, 2026. (AP Photo/Fatima Shbair)

Canada's Emma Miskew, left, Rachel Homan, right, and Sarah Wilkes study the situation during a women's curling semifinal match against Sweden, at the 2026 Winter Olympics, in Cortina d'Ampezzo, Italy, Friday, Feb. 20, 2026. (AP Photo/Misper Apawu)

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump paid a price for going it alone on tariffs — with the Supreme Court on Friday delivering a rare rebuke by ruling he lacked the power to declare an economic emergency and launch sweeping new taxes on imports.

Trump had made tariffs the bedrock of his economic pitch to voters going into the midterm elections, even describing tariffs as his “favorite word in the dictionary.” He promised that factories would relocate from overseas and bring jobs with them, and he warned that losing the tariffs could plunge the U.S. into a deep recession.

But Friday’s ruling will most likely prolong political and economic chaos over international trade through the election year.

Trump called the decision “a disgrace” after he was handed a note informing him of the Supreme Court decision during a private meeting with several governors, according to two people with knowledge of the president's reaction who spoke on the condition of anonymity. Another person, who was briefed on the conversation, disclosed that Trump said he has “to do something about these courts.”

The meeting with the governors ended shortly after Trump learned of the decision.

Trump is expected to address the ruling publicly during an afternoon press conference.

Republican strategist Doug Heye said it was immediately clear that the president “is not going to be happy" about the decision.

“We’re starting to hear about how this is a massive blow, a massive repudiation," he said.

However, Heye said Trump will try to find another way to pursue his trade agenda.

“Are they going to be able to figure out how to use this as an opportunity or not?" he asked. "There are too many questions.”

The White House plans to use alternative laws to preserve his tariffs, but those policies will only prolong the debate and keep alive an issue that is largely unpopular with voters.

About 6 in 10 Americans said Trump had gone too far on imposing new tariffs on other countries, according to an AP-NORC poll from January.

Even more worrisome for a president elected on the promise of fixing Americans’ concerns about affordability, 76% said in a poll conducted last April that Trump’s tariff policies would increase the cost of consumer goods in the U.S.

Trump’s aggressive use of tariffs had left many Republican lawmakers uneasy, publicly and privately, forcing them to defend what were essentially tax increases on the American public and businesses.

At various points during Trump’s second term, at least seven senators from the president's party have voiced their concerns. Earlier this month, six House Republicans joined with Democrats to vote for a resolution against Trump’s tariffs on Canada.

Indeed, free trade had long been a central plank of the Republican Party before Trump's rise to power.

Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Kentucky, described Trump's assertion that he can bypass Congress to implement tariffs as “illegal” in a statement praising the Supreme Court's decision.

“Congress’ role in trade policy, as I have warned repeatedly, is not an inconvenience to avoid,” the former top Senate Republican said. “If the executive would like to enact trade policies that impact American producers and consumers, its path forward is crystal clear: convince their representatives under Article 1” of the Constitution.

Former Vice President Mike Pence, who served during Trump's first term, cheered the ruling as a victory for the public, the separation of powers enshrined in the Constitution and free trade.

“American families and American businesses pay American tariffs — not foreign countries,” Pence wrote on social media. “With this decision, American families and businesses can breathe a sigh of relief.”

Democrats were quick to seize on the opportunity given to them by the Supreme Court, with Rep. Suzan DelBene, D-Wash., saying that Trump “is not a king” and his “tariffs were always illegal.”

“Republicans in Congress could have easily ended this economic crisis by standing up for their communities," said DelBene, chair of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. “Instead, they chose to bend the knee to Trump while families, small businesses, and farmers suffered from higher prices.”

The ruling essentially allows Trump's critics to say that he broke the law and that middle class families suffered as a result.

But Trump has claimed that his tariffs were the difference between national prosperity and deep poverty, a pitch he made on Thursday night to voters in the swing state of Georgia.

The president used the word “tariff” 28 times in his speech Thursday at a Georgia steel company, Coosa Steel, which credited the import taxes as making its products more competitive with goods from China.

“Without tariffs, this country would be in such trouble right now,” Trump charged.

Trump also complained that he had to justify his use of tariffs to the Supreme Court.

“I have to wait for this decision. I’ve been waiting forever, forever, and the language is clear that I have the right to do it as president,” he said. “I have the right to put tariffs on for national security purposes, countries that have been ripping us off for years.”

By a 6-3 vote, the high court said no.

The president has consistently misrepresented his tariffs, claiming despite evidence to the contrary that foreign governments would pay them and that the revenues would be sufficient to pay down the national debt and give taxpayers a dividend check.

New research tied to one of America’s leading banks found on Thursday that tariffs paid by midsize U.S. businesses tripled over the course of the past year.

The additional taxes have meant that companies that employ a combined 48 million people in the U.S. — the kinds of businesses that Trump had promised to revive — have had to find ways to absorb the new expense, by passing it along to customers in the form of higher prices, employing fewer workers or accepting lower profits.

Trump’s tariffs — not all of which were overturned — were expected to generate $3 trillion in revenues over 10 years, according to the Congressional Budget Office. That sum is large, but it would insufficient to cover the costs of the projected deficits.

The Supreme Court has not ruled on how any refund process would work.

Associated Press writer Steven Sloan contributed.

President Donald Trump speaks during a breakfast with the National Governors Association in the State Dining Room of the White House, Friday, Feb. 20, 2026, in Washington. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)