Adversarial re-check: all four sources cited by the prior rater were fetched and are real, live, and quoted accurately. The promise contains four commitments; three were delivered and one was not, with Trump personally leading every element. (1) 'Taxes on American Workers, Families, and Businesses can come down' -- KEPT: the IRS confirms the One Big Beautiful Bill Act was 'signed into law on July 4, 2025, as Public Law 119-21' with deductions for qualified tips (up to $25,000), overtime, car-loan interest, and a $6,000 senior deduction, 2025-2028. (2) 'baseline Tariffs on Foreign-made goods' -- KEPT in action: the April 2, 2025 White House fact sheet states 'President Trump will impose a 10% tariff on all countries. This will take effect April 5, 2025' plus 'an individualized reciprocal higher tariff' effective April 9. (3) 'pass the Trump Reciprocal Trade Act' -- NOT KEPT: the bill exists (H.R. 735, 119th Congress, short title verified from the govinfo bill text as 'United States Reciprocal Trade Act', introduced by Rep. Moore of West Virginia on January 24, 2025) but was never enacted. (4) 'respond to unfair Trading practices' -- KEPT via Section 232/301 actions. Durability is genuinely impaired: on February 20, 2026 the Supreme Court held 6-3 that 'IEEPA does not authorize the president to impose tariffs of any kind,' voiding the legal basis for the baseline and reciprocal tariffs and triggering refunds of roughly $166 billion; Trump re-imposed a global 10% tariff the same night under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, which by statute runs only 150 days (to July 24, 2026), and the Court of International Trade has since ruled those replacement tariffs illegal as well (on appeal). Applying the same standard I would apply to either party: a politician who personally drove the policy, got the tax half enacted as durable law, imposed the tariff half by executive action, but failed to pass the specific statute he named and saw the tariff vehicle struck down, is more than PARTIAL (which does not capture the leadership) and less than FULL (the named Act failed and the tariff regime was voided). CHAMPIONED (+0.75) is correct. Judicial invalidation is not the politician declining to act, so it does not drag the rating below CHAMPIONED; the un-passed Reciprocal Trade Act is what keeps it below FULL. Only correction to the prior rationale is a factual refinement, not an outcome change: the Section 122 proclamation was set at 10% with stated intent to raise to 15%, and it has itself been ruled unlawful at the trade court and is under appeal.