Or is he really that dumb think ok they blocked tariffs on all the countries on my list. So I will one up them by doing a global tariff. Explain to me the thinking behind that? Sorry you have to debase yourself to understand Trump mind. no sarcasm.
Or is he really that dumb think ok they blocked tariffs on all the countries on my list. So I will one up them by doing a global tariff. Explain to me the thinking behind that? Sorry you have to debase yourself to understand Trump mind. no sarcasm.
13 Comments
chickenf622@sh.itjust.works · 56 pts · 193d
He's using different mechanisms for enabling these new tariffs. The supreme court only said that the way the tariffs were created was unconstitutional.
thesohoriots@lemmy.world · 32 pts · 193d
Which, when they rule with a decision worded so narrowly (as they like to do), is sort of a wink to Trump that his behavior isn’t discouraged, but technically he just did it incorrectly and got caught. 6 to 3, of course.
cattywampas@lemmy.world · 28 pts · 193d
To play devil's advocate here, the Supreme Court's job is to interpret whether a specific thing is lawful or not according to the Constitution. It's not to encourage or discourage any general behavior or to enforce morality (any more than a system of laws already does, anyway).
thesohoriots@lemmy.world · 11 pts · 193d
True; however, from the text of the opinion:
It’s a little more subtle, but what I’m picking up is, Hey Trump’s legal team (ya clowns), in this instance, you should find a way to “regulate” that does not involve “taxation” because that falls under congress’ jurisdiction. This is your way to do it. But it will be lost on Trump, of course, because he’s madder than a rattlesnake at a Thai wedding.
bitjunkie@lemmy.world · 9 pts · 193d
It was a split decision though, not the 6-3 on ideological lines that we normally get.
Horsecook@sh.itjust.works · 23 pts · 193d
ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world · 20 pts · 193d
We are full on in a constitutional crisis. Have been for a while.
Horsecook@sh.itjust.works · 7 pts · 193d
bluGill@fedia.io · 3 pts · 193d
Write your congressman - pressure is something they care about, mid term elections are coming up and fear of losing is going to start driving them.
Horsecook@sh.itjust.works · 6 pts · 193d
faltryka@lemmy.world · 22 pts · 193d
When it takes him minutes with an EO to make up a new reason for tariffs and it takes the SC months/weeks/days to undo them then the SC really doesn’t matter does it.
dave881@lemmy.world · 15 pts · 193d
As I understand it, there are several laws that allow for imposing tarrifs, each with differing requirements for justification and how large the tariff can be.
The International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) is one that the administration has cited as the law granting the authority for many of the tariffs imposed by this administration.
The tarrifs imposed under IEEPA are the ones that the Supreme Court were addressing with this ruling. Basically saying that the law does not give the president as much authority as he claimed, making those terrifs illegal.
Tarrifs that the administration claims are authorized under different laws will have to be the subject of separate legal claims.
Sanctus@anarchist.nexus · 7 pts · 193d
Yes, he is really this fucking stupid. Thats all there is too it. He thinks he can puff his chest and they will back off.
Soulphite@reddthat.com · 9 pts · 193d
I mean they kinda have before on other issues. They gave the childfucker absolute immunity for any official acts he (and future presidents... just a formality) do that could be used against him in prosecution.
frustrated_phagocytosis@fedia.io · 6 pts · 193d
There's a mechanism in the law that allows for tariffs up to 15% for 150 days for trade deficits. So just wait 150 days for it to go away I guess.
reddig33@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 193d
hitmyspot@aussie.zone · 5 pts · 193d
So, all of the downside with disruption and loss of trade partners, with none of the upside?.sounds like trump.