The Supreme Court could rule on the legality of President Trump's tariffs as soon as tomorrow, and a raft of analysis will surely follow as economists and Wall Street researchers parse the fallout.

Why it matters: Yet figuring out what to make of that research may prove complicated. Trump already has Wall Street analysts on edge with his often fiery condemnations of their work.

State of play: Just yesterday, Trump economic adviser Kevin Hassett called a paper from researchers at the New York Fed "an embarrassment" and said its authors should be "disciplined."

• The research found that American consumers and companies paid about 90% of the cost of Trump's tariffs last year following several other reports with similar conclusions.

The big picture: The dustup was a reminder of the trigger-happy political atmosphere around economic research, heightening concerns that Trump's criticism is muffling commentary from Wall Street.

• Multiple firms have been toning down and censoring their research for fear of angering the White House, Bloomberg reported.

Flashback: In August, Goldman Sachs chief economist Jan Hatzius put out a report also saying Americans pay some portion of the tariff cost. Trump then posted the bank's CEO Davis Solomon should fire the well-respected analyst.

• Earlier this year, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said the head of Deutsche Bank called him to say the bank "does not stand by" an analyst report that suggested European investors may step up sales of U.S. assets. The bank later said the independence of its research was "sacrosanct."
• And last April, a JPMorgan analyst voluntarily redacted his analysis of White House policy, literally blacking out portions of a report.

What they're saying: Asked whether the White House comments chill the speech of economists and analysts, spokesman Kush Desai said:

• "What should chill the work of these economists is the fact that they have consistently beclowned themselves by pushing one doom-and-gloom prediction and 'study' after another about President Trump's tariffs."
• Trump, Desai said, "implemented a historic tariffs agenda while cooling inflation, renegotiating trade deals, accelerating economic growth and securing trillions in investments — the exact opposite of what these economists predicted would happen."

Between the lines: Wall Street research isn't like a policy white paper or even an academic report. It's intended for investors.

• "I don't think people in Washington understand what our research reports are for," one person at a top Wall Street bank tells Axios. "They're written for clients."
• Banks have a fiduciary duty to their customers. They can't really change their findings to suit the administration.
• This person's advice to bank analysts: Be clinical, not colorful and do good work for your clients and you'll "be fine."

Reality check: "I try not to be political, but on a scientific question or an economic question, I'm going to state exactly my mind," says David Kelly, chief global strategist at JPMorgan Asset Management.

• Analysts say what they think, he says, and those that don't have "no business doing the job."

Zoom in: The findings of the New York Fed report that Hassett criticized are not controversial among economists both conservative and liberal.

• "I think the findings of the paper are consistent with what standard economic analysis would suggest," Michael Strain, an economist at the conservative American Enterprise Institute, tells Axios.
• "I trust the Fed research," Kelly says. "I actually came up with the same result."

What to watch: The Supreme Court could issue its tariff ruling tomorrow or next Tuesday or Wednesday.

• As of this morning, there was a 26% chance the justices uphold the tariffs, per Polymarket.

Oil prices jumped to their highest levels since last summer amid growing signs the U.S. is preparing a military strike against Iran.

The latest: Prices climbed well over 4% yesterday and are rising again today.

• The global benchmark Brent crude is at over $71 per barrel this morning, while the U.S. standard, West Texas Intermediate, is around $66.

State of play: "For oil markets, the concern is clearly what action would mean not only for Iranian oil supply, but also broader Persian Gulf oil flows, given the risk of disruption to shipments through the Strait of Hormuz," per a note from ING analysts yesterday.

• Iran exports about 1.5 million barrels a day, mostly to China. But the Strait of Hormuz — the narrow sea passage next to Iran — is a choke point that handles a whopping one-fourth or so of the global maritime oil trade.

The big picture: There's lots of supply now sloshing around a pretty soft market marked by modest demand growth and rising output.

• These conditions — and hence rather modest U.S. gasoline prices — expand Trump's geopolitical running room.

What they're saying: "Geopolitical issues, above all Iran, are the key bullish factor in the oil market at the moment," University of Texas-Austin energy analyst Ben Cahill tells Axios via email.

• "Otherwise there's not a whole lot of price support toward $70 [per barrel]. The slack in this market could embolden the White House," he writes.

Go deeper

Unicorn sightings were once relatively rare and sometimes contested, but now they're kind of basic, actually.

• Apollo Global Management chief economist Torsten Slok tracked 857 private companies valued at $1 billion or more in the U.S., per his note yesterday.
• Worldwide, the number tops 1,000, per a tracker by CBC Insights.

State of play: The hot new mythical animal metaphors include "decacorns," private companies valued at $10 billion or more, as Lora Kelley explained in the New York Times.

• "Hectocorns" are companies more than $100 billion, such as SpaceX, OpenAI and Anthropic.

Flashback: In 2021, Axios' Dan Primack coined the term "dragons" for private companies worth over $12 billion.

What to watch: "Soonicorns" — companies on the edge of unicorn status.