Supreme Court strikes down Trump's sweeping global tariffs

The ruling opens the door to potentially hundreds of billions of dollars in tariff refunds.

Not a good day for Trump with the SC ruling against the reasons for many of his tariffs

A good example of the SC Conservative majority not being controlled or aligned to everything he does

Supreme Court Shocks World by Correctly Declaring Trump's Global Tariffs Unconstitutional

Edit: Whoops I guess I wasnt on the last page when I added this.

Is there anyone who would enforce this anyways? If D win the next round, they will have to deal with it. Things will be fun and 4 years later, R will come back and continue with business as usual.

/Edit: lol, of course all of this is another scam https://www.wired.com/story/cantor-fitzgerald-trump-tariff-refunds/

Edited yesterday at 05:17 PM1 day by Lexx

I've been expecting the Supreme Court to strike down the tariffs ever since Howard Nutlick's former associates started buying up potential tariff recourse claims. I'd say it can't get any more obvious, but with this administration, any more obvious was stretched to the limit with Trump's meme coin.

I'm reading Trump has a plan B, and that the tariffs will continue under some other name.

Cato Institute

The Supreme Court Got It Right on IEEPA—But Don't Pop the...

The Court did important work by reining in the misuse of IEEPA. But judicial intervention can only go so far.

Was a banger of a press conference too.

Edited yesterday at 08:13 PM1 day by Malcador

13 hours ago, Gorgon said:

I'm reading Trump has a plan B, and that the tariffs will continue under some other name.

Yes, he can do tariffs in another form and see how they work

But for me thats not the significance of this ruling

There are 2 main takeaways from this

• the majority Conservative SC will not always support his policies. There has always been a concern around this because its a 6-3 Conservative majority.

• Trump's overall ability to implement sweeping policies effectively has been undermined

And I predict this will become worse after the Midterms where the GOP will lose control of either the House and or the Senate

But end of day its a victory for US Democracy, and global Democracy, because its an example of the functional structure of the checks and balances that all US presidents must be accountable to

Can you ever imagine the courts in Russia or China being able to reject and reverse something as significant as these tariffs that the state decided to implement and vociferously support

Edited 15 hours ago15 hr by BruceVC

Being better than Russia or China on a democracy scale is a very low bar.

1 hour ago, Gorgon said:

Being better than Russia or China on a democracy scale is a very low bar.

Sure but my point is there are people who question the importance of government accountability that only exists in Democracies where courts are independent

Its not just in Russia or China where courts would never reverse this type of decision by the president or leadership

In South Africa I sometimes hear support for more autocratic countries because there leaders are seen as "strong " but people dont realize what freedoms they lose under those same governments

20 hours ago, Malcador said:

The Wacko in Chief thinks he's Paul Atreidies: "He who can destroy a thing, controls a thing." Which, of course, is a logical absurdity. Presumably he believes he's being funny. Must be rich man's "humor", I suppose.

I don't think it's very note worthy that the Supreme Court blocked the tariffs. One thing they've been consistent about during the Trump regime is not letting Trump and the rest of Jeffery's old friends **** with the money too much.

Sadly, and I really hate to say this, Trump is right in a way. The supreme court has already ceded power and immunity to him specifically; the carveouts for ecobomic stuff like tariffs and the Fed are not consistent with the logic of the unitary executive the court has used to authorize his power. Honestly I find it more contemptible than if the reactionary judges were to go in whole hog as it just shows the bankruptcy of their position, ie being ruled by a king is fine until he tries to crash the stonks.

4 hours ago, Gorgon said:

Being better than Russia or China on a democracy scale is a very low bar.

holding vote regularly have no intrinsic positive value

roman senate have no moral highground compare to pretty much anyone

The absence of regular voting is worse. Having said that, the American political system is a bit of a joke. They should break up the two party system into smaller constituents like they do in anti trust cases, and institute proportional representation just for starters. An anti corruption drive is also sorely needed. by 'drive' I probably mean purge. Lock the worst offenders up and scare the rest straight.

1 hour ago, uuuhhii said:

holding vote regularly have no intrinsic positive value

roman senate have no moral highground compare to pretty much anyone

So how would you suggest political leadership gets decided in any country?

Or are you only talking about the USA?

The mere act of casting votes is certainly not of itself a good thing. If there's no real choice it simply acts to grant legitimacy which hasn't actually been earned, which is of course why a lot of authoritarian countries still hold elections.

If you look at the last US Presidential election, which Trump won handily, the proportions were:

Harris ~31%

Trump ~32%

Didn't Vote ~36%

ie ~2/3 of people in the US didn't vote for its President, and more than 1/3 either didn't like either candidate enough to vote for them nor dislike a candidate enough to vote against them. Not exactly healthy.

(Really, the Roman Republic model was an awful one to choose if you wanted proper (little d) democracy since it started breaking down as soon as Rome stopped being a regional power; and along similar lines as you see in the US. Probably better than Athenian Big D Democracy at least though; nothing quite as unique in history as stampeding voters into voting to execute all your- victorious- admirals, rejecting peace and then losing the war spectacularly a year later)