Supreme Court Rules Against Trump’s Tariffs

[Vermilion]

The what if's with executive power abuse already has happened, under many administrations before Trump. It's a large reason why he won, a strong appetite of the people to push back on the establishment and elites. 

Another what if that happened was the blanket tariffs being rules unconstitutional. Most people knew that was going to happen, which is why the tariffs didn't have the intended effect. Why would businesses spend massive amounts of money to mitigate something that is very temporary?

They could have been targeted and codified. That would have been legal and actually deliver certainty and results. That's what all of this is about. 

If your argument is that Trump didn't destroy the planet, I do agree with you there. We are still very much alive and well. However, I'm merely questioning why we're doing something if we know it's unconstitutional and will just be reversed. I suppose I don't see the benefit in that.

You keep saying it’s unconstitutional.
Many presidents have done the same thing, under the same statute, and it was constitutional then.
Why not now?
OMB
When it comes to Trump, there’s usually a double standard involved, as is the case here.
Precedent is there.
You know this.

[Oldcarpy2]

The tariffs generated $264 billion in 2025 and $118 billion so far this year.
The tariffs haven’t doomed the American consumer like the anti-Americans wished.
Inflation down, GDP up.

UK, Japan, EU, South Korea, Indonesia, Vietnam, Malaysia, Cambodia, Thailand, Argentina, Bangladesh, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, North Macedonia and adjustments to Canada and Mexico.
Those deals.

And USA just won the men’s hockey gold in overtime.
Winning.

Generated from who?

Well done in the hockey, though.

Was that down to Trump?

[CriticalStinker]

You keep saying it’s unconstitutional.
Many presidents have done the same thing, under the same statute, and it was constitutional then.
Why not now?
OMB
When it comes to Trump, there’s usually a double standard involved, as is the case here.
Precedent is there.
You know this.

Many presidents have. Trump even had some of his tariffs stay in place since the first term. Tariffs aren't bad, as I've said many times they can be a very useful tool.

But the president doesn't have the authority to tariffs every country on earth without a plan. The law you're speaking about is clearly worded in that it gives authority in emergency situations. If a president can say the financial emergency gives him the authority on all economic decision making, then any president can just declare that and go against the constitution.

Most people knew this would happen. Polymarket had it over 70% most of the time that this would be ruled unconstitutional. That's why these couldn't be effective. Put tariffs on China, and countries that resell Chinese goods and the tariffs will stay in place, just like they did the first term. Hone in on certain industries, and provide protections for American goods. Those tariffs will stick, hell, I bet congress doesn't even have to codify them.

Putting tariffs on literally everything is taxation without representation. It's literally why this nation was formed. Nothing we say on this forum will change the constitution, or the reality Trump doesn't have more power than the constitution. It's a really weird hill to die on when they didn't even work. The best people can say is that it didn't destroy America. Or maybe we got some trade deals out of it with certain countries, but that isn't a net gain, as the US dollar is down 10%. Most American's don't benefit directly off a trade deal with another country, so if you give them a 10% haircut on all the money they earn, I wouldn't say it's a deal they're thrilled with.

Or maybe you could say the stock market is up. Trump claims that people said we couldn't get to 50k with DOW in 4 years, yet he did it in one. What was the increase, 12%? 12% in a year is around average, I'll be generous and say its above average. Now lets adjust it for the USD being down 10%, just like we measure markets vs inflation. Where are we at now? Below average.

So the argument is they weren't as harmful as we thought they would be. I don't think that's a great argument to justify someone doing something unconstitutional because it doesn't hurt as much as we thought it would.

[ANNEE]

Trump doesn't have more power than the constitution. 

And yet these 3 judges supported Trump. 

As they have done and continue to do — allowing Trump more power than the  Constitution. 
 

• Brett Kavanaugh (conservative)
  
• Clarence Thomas (conservative)
  
• Samuel Alito (conservative)
  

So much for checks and balances.

[Vermilion]

Many presidents have. Trump even had some of his tariffs stay in place since the first term. Tariffs aren't bad, as I've said many times they can be a very useful tool.

But the president doesn't have the authority to tariffs every country on earth without a plan. The law you're speaking about is clearly worded in that it gives authority in emergency situations. If a president can say the financial emergency gives him the authority on all economic decision making, then any president can just declare that and go against the constitution.

Most people knew this would happen. Polymarket had it over 70% most of the time that this would be ruled unconstitutional. That's why these couldn't be effective. Put tariffs on China, and countries that resell Chinese goods and the tariffs will stay in place, just like they did the first term. Hone in on certain industries, and provide protections for American goods. Those tariffs will stick, hell, I bet congress doesn't even have to codify them.

Putting tariffs on literally everything is taxation without representation. It's literally why this nation was formed. Nothing we say on this forum will change the constitution, or the reality Trump doesn't have more power than the constitution. It's a really weird hill to die on when they didn't even work. The best people can say is that it didn't destroy America. Or maybe we got some trade deals out of it with certain countries, but that isn't a net gain, as the US dollar is down 10%. Most American's don't benefit directly off a trade deal with another country, so if you give them a 10% haircut on all the money they earn, I wouldn't say it's a deal they're thrilled with.

Or maybe you could say the stock market is up. Trump claims that people said we couldn't get to 50k with DOW in 4 years, yet he did it in one. What was the increase, 12%? 12% in a year is around average, I'll be generous and say its above average. Now lets adjust it for the USD being down 10%, just like we measure markets vs inflation. Where are we at now? Below average.

So the argument is they weren't as harmful as we thought they would be. I don't think that's a great argument to justify someone doing something unconstitutional because it doesn't hurt as much as we thought it would.

It says the president can regulate importation during a declared emergency.
There’s a declared emergency.

They’re now saying the president can’t impose tariffs but he can completely stop trade from countries.
That makes absolutely no legal sense.

[CriticalStinker]

It says the president can regulate importation during a declared emergency.
There’s a declared emergency.

They’re now saying the president can’t impose tariffs but he can completely stop trade from countries.
That makes absolutely no legal sense.

And the courts ruled that the declared emergency doesn't apply to all imports, from every country. You have to show clear justification for an emergency, or else any president can just declare emergencies and do whatever they want. These are features, not a bug.

Read the law, it does make sense. It gives president powers to stop trade in times of emergency. Think about that context, it is so we don't have to wait on congress in times of war or other emergencies to react to a hostile nation. Tariffs however are a tax, and you shouldn't need me to tell you this nation was founded on fighting taxation without representation.

He still has the power to tariff. No one is going to fight tariffs against China, or clearly defined ones. We had a trade surplus with Australia and still hit them with tariffs. Canada imported more goods from the US than any other nation, yet we were more hostile to them than most. 

Thankfully, the US is a very resource rich nation. But that doesn't mean we can produce all resources we consume. So there are commodities and inputs for production that have to be imported. We're taxing those businesses and the consumer when there is no other option. That is taxation without representation, they had no other option. 

And rather than hone in his tariffs, and make them legal, he is doubling down even noting he's going to defy the Supreme Court and constitution. His base is celebrating that out of pride. He very much could enact meaningful tariffs that make sense, but out of pride it has to be the whole world and every imported good. Even though it hasn't shown a strong benefit vs the cost.

[chr0naut]

It says the president can regulate importation during a declared emergency.
There’s a declared emergency.

They’re now saying the president can’t impose tariffs but he can completely stop trade from countries.
That makes absolutely no legal sense.

Umm, if everything is going great in the Trumpconomy, where is there an emergency?

Can you see the cognitive dissonance going on there?

[Vermilion]

Umm, if everything is going great in the Trumpconomy, where is there an emergency?

Can you see the cognitive dissonance going on there?

We have issues with fentanyl trafficking, illegal immigration, drugs across borders with Canada, Mexico, and China, supply chain issues, and a giant deficit.
We also have a president, for once, who is trying to fix it.

What’s going great is what Trump has been able to do so far despite the constant unrelenting obstruction by the other two branches of government.

[IDELB2006]

What’s going great is what Trump has been able to do so far despite the constant unrelenting obstruction by the other two branches of government.

Just imagine if the Republicans lose Congress.

[Oldcarpy2]

We have issues with fentanyl trafficking, illegal immigration, drugs across borders with Canada, Mexico, and China, supply chain issues, and a giant deficit.
We also have a president, for once, who is trying to fix it.

What’s going great is what Trump has been able to do so far despite the constant unrelenting obstruction by the other two branches of government.

Yeah, and your pesky Constitution.