SCOTUS Decides Tariffs

"US stock market on the verge of largest loss today: Dow, S& 500, Nasdaq 100 wiped out over 1.5%"
 
This wipeout courtesy of Trump's tariff tantrum.

"The sell-off intensified after President Donald Trump warned of higher tariffs following a Supreme Court decision that struck down his sweeping tariff policy. Investors are reacting to renewed trade war volatility, rising geopolitical risk, and mounting concerns over Big Tech earnings and AI spending."

https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/international/us/us-stock-market-on-the-verge-of-largest-loss-today-dow-sp-500-nasdaq-100-wiped-out-over-1-5-as-losses-accelerate-magnificent-seven-stocks-take-trump-tariff-toll-check-the-biggest-losers-here/articleshow/128721785.cms?from=mdr


"Trump continued to assert his ability to increase tariffs, warning of higher duties for countries that want to “play games” after the high court’s ruling."

“Any Country that wants to ‘play games’ with the ridiculous supreme court decision, especially those that have ‘Ripped Off’ the U.S.A. for years, and even decades, will be met with a much higher Tariff, and worse, than that which they just recently agreed to,” he wrote in a post on Truth Social on Monday. “BUYER BEWARE!!!”


https://www.cnbc.com/2026/02/22/stock-market-today-live-updates.html

Dementia Don on parade...

Originally Posted by Rod Kaufman

Ok, you're right as I looked into it a bit more and beyond that in the SCOTUS blog. HOWEVER, "The Supreme Court did not overrule tariffs. They merely overruled a particular use of IEPPA tariffs," Trump said. 
https://www.businessinsider.com/supreme-court-overturn-trump-tariffs-biden-student-loan-forgiveness-2026-2

Now, go argue with Trump!

PS: It is axiomatic that Clarence and Sammy are still hacks...

I am sure there are certain specific statutes which give the president some limited tariff authority in certain circumstances. Just like there may be some statute out there that gives the president limited authority to cancel student loan debt in certain circumstances. The key point is that the authority of the executive is limited by the scope of the statute. 

This dovetails nicely with our conversation with Russ the other day.   If we the people want our president to be able to cancel student loans in a broad and general manner, or if we want our president to have the authority to impose tariffs in a broad and general manner, it is our obligation to elect a federal legislature that will pass a broad statute specifically giving the president those powers.   These cases are brilliant examples of the legislature acting as a curb to executive overreach, enforced by the Court.   The system works.

Originally Posted by James Brown

I am sure there are certain specific statutes which give the president some limited tariff authority in certain circumstances. Just like there may be some statute out there that gives the president limited authority to cancel student loan debt in certain circumstances. The key point is that the authority of the executive is limited by the scope of the statute. 

This dovetails nicely with our conversation with Russ the other day.   If we the people want our president to be able to cancel student loans in a broad and general manner, or if we want our president to have the authority to impose tariffs in a broad and general manner, it is our obligation to elect a federal legislature that will pass a broad statute specifically giving the president those powers.   These cases are brilliant examples of the legislature acting as a curb to executive overreach, enforced by the Court.   The system works.

Jim, what's your take on what Gorsuch has to say about the ruling:

https://thehill.com/homenews/5751497-gorsuch-criticizes-fellow-justices/

Originally Posted by Rod Kaufman

Jim, what's your take on what Gorsuch has to say about the ruling:

https://thehill.com/homenews/5751497-gorsuch-criticizes-fellow-justices/

I think he is right that the left and right wings of the court have been inconsistent, and I am glad he called them on it.