Supreme Court says Trump global tariffs are illegal

8,669 Views | 201 Replies | Last: 1 mo ago by DiabloWags
bearister
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
7:09a, 2/20/26
Reuters: U.S. SUPREME COURT RULES AGAINST TRUMP'S GLOBAL TARIFFS ENACTED UNDER A FEDERAL LAW MEANT FOR NATIONAL EMERGENCIES

BIG: 6-3 decision written by Justice Roberts.

Thomas, Alito, and Kavanaugh dissent.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/24-1287_4gcj.pdf
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside

“I love Cal deeply, by the way, what are the directions to The Portal from Sproul Plaza?”
Reply Quote
9
3 edits
DiabloWags
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
7:11a, 2/20/26
HUGE BLOW TO THE TRUMP AGENDA!



Supreme Court strikes down Trump's sweeping tariffs, upending central plank of economic agenda
Cults don't end well. They really don't.
Reply Quote
9
1 edit
BearlySane88
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
7:24a, 2/20/26
We knew this was coming, doesn't surprise me at all. I know the administration is already working on the other ways to implement tariffs, this ruling doesn't stop that.
Reply Quote
3
DiabloWags
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
7:31a, 2/20/26
LOL!

Cults don't end well. They really don't.
Reply Quote
4
DiabloWags
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
7:34a, 2/20/26
Do Not Collect $2,000
Do Not Pass Go.

Instead, it looks like the U.S. Treasury will be doling out about $133 Billion in refunds.


Cults don't end well. They really don't.
Reply Quote
6
1 edit
Eastern Oregon Bear
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
7:37a, 2/20/26
Where do I get my refund for stuff I overpaid for?
Reply Quote
7
DiabloWags
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Eastern Oregon Bear • 7:40a, 2/20/26
Eastern Oregon Bear said:
Where do I get my refund for stuff I overpaid for?


The U.S. Treasury is gonna be busy cutting a lot of checks.

Between $133 - $175 Billion.



Cults don't end well. They really don't.
Reply Quote
5
1 edit
BearlySane88
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
7:43a, 2/20/26
It's a little strange that you hate Trump so much you're celebrating losing money, seems like your priorities are all backwards.
Reply Quote
3
concordtom
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
7:44a, 2/20/26
Clipped from news article:


The majority found that the Constitution "very clearly" gives Congress the power to impose taxes, which include tariffs. "The Framers did not vest any part of the taxing power in the Executive Branch," Chief Justice John Roberts wrote.

Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas and Brett Kavanaugh dissented.

"The tariffs at issue here may or may not be wise policy. But as a matter of text, history, and precedent, they are clearly lawful," Kavanaugh wrote in the dissent.

The tariffs decision doesn't stop Trump from imposing duties under other laws. While those have more limitations on the speed and severity of Trump's actions, top administration officials have said they expect to keep the tariff framework in place under other authorities.


Trump will never stop.
Until he STOPS
Reply Quote
4
concordtom
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to DiabloWags • 7:46a, 2/20/26
DiabloWags said:
Eastern Oregon Bear said:
Where do I get my refund for stuff I overpaid for?


The U.S. Treasury is gonna be busy cutting a lot of checks.

Between $133 - $175 Billion.



This is the most interesting aspect to me. How many companies will be a part of a lawsuit or something…I imagine that's what it will take.
Reply Quote
2
DiabloWags
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to BearlySane88 • 7:49a, 2/20/26
BearlySane88 said:
It's a little strange that you hate Trump so much you're celebrating losing money, seems like your priorities are all backwards.


The stock market seems to like the news.
And I'm making money.

Thanks!

Cults don't end well. They really don't.
Reply Quote
3
1 edit
BearlySane88
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to DiabloWags • 7:53a, 2/20/26
It's not all about you. I was speaking on the government and your country losing money.

You've already claimed that you were doing great under Trump's tax cuts and policies. You can doubly thank him now
Reply Quote
3
1 edit
DiabloWags
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to concordtom • 7:54a, 2/20/26
concordtom said:
DiabloWags said:
Eastern Oregon Bear said:
Where do I get my refund for stuff I overpaid for?


The U.S. Treasury is gonna be busy cutting a lot of checks.

Between $133 - $175 Billion.



This is the most interesting aspect to me. How many companies will be a part of a lawsuit or something…I imagine that's what it will take.


They've already sued.

I would imagine that FORD will be crying the hardest for a refund.
Tariffs only cost them about $2 BILLION.

This is how you MAGA!

Here's What Happens If Supreme Court Overturns Trump Tariffs

These Top Global Companies Have Sued Trump for Tariff Refunds - Business Insider
Cults don't end well. They really don't.
Reply Quote
3
2 edits
DiabloWags
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to BearlySane88 • 7:55a, 2/20/26
BearlySane88 said:
It's not all about you. I was speaking on the government and your country losing money.



How is the Country losing money on something that was NOT LEGAL in the first place?
Please explain.
Cults don't end well. They really don't.
Reply Quote
5
Eastern Oregon Bear
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to BearlySane88 • 7:57a, 2/20/26
BearlySane88 said:
It's not all about you. I was speaking on the government and your country losing money.

You've already claimed that you were doing great under Trump's tax cuts and policies. You can doubly thank him now

Personally, I don't thank people for their incompetence. I haven't enjoyed the George Costanza Presidency and the endless string of "Was that wrong?" situations.
Reply Quote
8
1 edit
BearlySane88
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Eastern Oregon Bear • 8:00a, 2/20/26
Eastern Oregon Bear said:
BearlySane88 said:
It's not all about you. I was speaking on the government and your country losing money.

You've already claimed that you were doing great under Trump's tax cuts and policies. You can doubly thank him now

Personally, I don't thank people for their incompetence. I haven't enjoyed the George Costanza Presidency and the endless string of "Was that wrong?" comments.


I was asking Wags because he has already stated multiple times that his money is booming under Trump
Reply Quote
3
tequila4kapp
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:00a, 2/20/26
In my humble opinion this may end up being the single most consequential decision from SCOTUS during Trump's 8 years. A hallmark of Trump is that he has used the economic might of our economy (via tariffs) to achieve foreign policy and international economic objectives. It was IMO one of the most overlooked and brilliant moves by a President in recent times. Unfortunately, it was also illegal.
Reply Quote
5
BearlySane88
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to DiabloWags • 8:01a, 2/20/26
DiabloWags said:
BearlySane88 said:
It's not all about you. I was speaking on the government and your country losing money.



How is the Country losing money on something that was NOT LEGAL in the first place?
Please explain.


"The U.S. Treasury is gonna be busy cutting a lot of checks.

Between $133 - $175 Billion."
-Wags 2/20/2026
Reply Quote
3
BearlySane88
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to tequila4kapp • 8:02a, 2/20/26
tequila4kapp said:
In my humble opinion this may end up being the single most consequential decision from SCOTUS during Trump's 8 years. A hallmark of Trump is that he has used the economic might of our economy (via tariffs) to achieve foreign policy and international economic objectives. It was IMO one of the most overlooked and brilliant moves by a President in recent times. Unfortunately, it was also illegal.


I agree. It will be interesting to see if he's able, or tries, to build them back up through other means.
Reply Quote
3
DiabloWags
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to tequila4kapp • 8:04a, 2/20/26
tequila4kapp said:
In my humble opinion this may end up being the single most consequential decision from SCOTUS during Trump's 8 years. A hallmark of Trump is that he has used the economic might of our economy (via tariffs) to achieve foreign policy and international economic objectives. It was IMO one of the most overlooked and brilliant moves by a President in recent times. Unfortunately, it was also illegal.


Perhaps it hasn't been used in "recent times" due to the fact that most know that it's illegal.
Tariffs in "recent times" have only been used when it comes to "dumping of product" in our market.

ie.) Bush's tariff on imported steel in March of 2002 that got lifted in December of 2003.

2002 United States steel tariff - Wikipedia

Cults don't end well. They really don't.
Reply Quote
4
6 edits
BearlySane88
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:07a, 2/20/26
Reply Quote
3
BearlySane88
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:10a, 2/20/26
Reply Quote
3
tequila4kapp
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to DiabloWags • 8:15a, 2/20/26
DiabloWags said:
tequila4kapp said:
In my humble opinion this may end up being the single most consequential decision from SCOTUS during Trump's 8 years. A hallmark of Trump is that he has used the economic might of our economy (via tariffs) to achieve foreign policy and international economic objectives. It was IMO one of the most overlooked and brilliant moves by a President in recent times. Unfortunately, it was also illegal.


Perhaps it hasn't been used in "recent times" due to the fact that most know that it's illegal.
Tariffs in "recent times" have only been used when it comes to "dumping of product" in our market.

ie.) Bush's tariff on imported steel in March of 2002 that got lifted in December of 2003.

2002 United States steel tariff - Wikipedia

That isn't my point. Virtually every international achievement has come at the hands of tariffs. Not long drawn out diplomacy. Not threat of military action. Without tariffs NATO would still be paying less than 2%, we'd have the terribly one sided trade deals with most of the world and we'd probably have some number of dead service members.

I fully understand your and other's objections to them as a tax. We got a lot of benefit from that tax.
Reply Quote
4
1 edit
bearister
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to BearlySane88 • 8:16a, 2/20/26
BearlySane88 said:
We knew this was coming, doesn't surprise me at all. I know the administration is already working on the other ways to implement tariffs, this ruling doesn't stop that.


That may well be, but I would rather be sitting where the good guys are sitting right now with regard to this matter as opposed to wherever "We" are sitting.


If someone from the free press can formulate just the right question, a major malfunction may occur.
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside

“I love Cal deeply, by the way, what are the directions to The Portal from Sproul Plaza?”
Reply Quote
6
2 edits
DiabloWags
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to tequila4kapp • 8:17a, 2/20/26
tequila4kapp said:
DiabloWags said:
tequila4kapp said:
In my humble opinion this may end up being the single most consequential decision from SCOTUS during Trump's 8 years. A hallmark of Trump is that he has used the economic might of our economy (via tariffs) to achieve foreign policy and international economic objectives. It was IMO one of the most overlooked and brilliant moves by a President in recent times. Unfortunately, it was also illegal.


Perhaps it hasn't been used in "recent times" due to the fact that most know that it's illegal.
Tariffs in "recent times" have only been used when it comes to "dumping of product" in our market.

ie.) Bush's tariff on imported steel in March of 2002 that got lifted in December of 2003.

2002 United States steel tariff - Wikipedia

That isn't my point. Virtually every international achievement has come at the hands of tariffs. Not long drawn out diplomacy. Not thread of military action. Without tariffs NATO would still be paying less than 2%, we'd have the terribly one sided trade deals with most of the world and we'd probably have some number of dead service members.

I fully understand your and other's objections to them as a tax. We got a lot of benefit from that tax.


What "benefits" did we receive from that tax?
A tax on American households that cost them $1200 last year.
A tax on Ford Motor Company that cost them $2 Billion.

I'm not following your logic.
Cults don't end well. They really don't.
Reply Quote
5
3 edits
Anarchistbear
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to bearister • 8:20a, 2/20/26
bearister said:
BearlySane88 said:
We knew this was coming, doesn't surprise me at all. I know the administration is already working on the other ways to implement tariffs, this ruling doesn't stop that.


That may well be, but I would rather be sitting where the good guys are sitting right now with regard to this matter as opposed to wherever "We" are sitting.


Who are the "good guys" in this?
Reply Quote
3
BearlySane88
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to DiabloWags • 8:22a, 2/20/26
DiabloWags said:
tequila4kapp said:
DiabloWags said:
tequila4kapp said:
In my humble opinion this may end up being the single most consequential decision from SCOTUS during Trump's 8 years. A hallmark of Trump is that he has used the economic might of our economy (via tariffs) to achieve foreign policy and international economic objectives. It was IMO one of the most overlooked and brilliant moves by a President in recent times. Unfortunately, it was also illegal.


Perhaps it hasn't been used in "recent times" due to the fact that most know that it's illegal.
Tariffs in "recent times" have only been used when it comes to "dumping of product" in our market.

ie.) Bush's tariff on imported steel in March of 2002 that got lifted in December of 2003.

2002 United States steel tariff - Wikipedia

That isn't my point. Virtually every international achievement has come at the hands of tariffs. Not long drawn out diplomacy. Not thread of military action. Without tariffs NATO would still be paying less than 2%, we'd have the terribly one sided trade deals with most of the world and we'd probably have some number of dead service members.

I fully understand your and other's objections to them as a tax. We got a lot of benefit from that tax.


What "benefits" did we receive from that tax?
A tax on American households that cost them $1200 last year.
A tax on Ford Motor Company that cost them $2 Billion.

I'm not following your logic.


Diplomatic leverage. He explained it in his post
Reply Quote
4
DiabloWags
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to BearlySane88 • 8:24a, 2/20/26
BearlySane88 said:

Diplomatic leverage. He explained it in his post


I'm sure that Tequila can speak for himself.
I didn't ask you.

Thanks.
Cults don't end well. They really don't.
Reply Quote
5
1 edit
DiabloWags
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to BearlySane88 • 8:30a, 2/20/26
BearlySane88 said:
DiabloWags said:
BearlySane88 said:
It's not all about you. I was speaking on the government and your country losing money.



How is the Country losing money on something that was NOT LEGAL in the first place?
Please explain.


"The U.S. Treasury is gonna be busy cutting a lot of checks.

Between $133 - $175 Billion."
-Wags 2/20/2026


I repeat: The money that the U.S. Treasury took in was NOT LEGAL IN THE FIRST PLACE.

The Supreme Court of the United States of America just said so.

So Trump and his Administration can throw that CBO estimate of tariffs generating $2.5 Trillion over the next decade out the window.

Time for a reality check when it comes to deficits and interest payments on the national debt.
Stop spending so much freaking money!!!

Bessent said that they had $774 Billion on hand as of Jan. 8th.
So start the repayments now.





Cults don't end well. They really don't.
Reply Quote
5
5 edits
BearlySane88
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to DiabloWags • 8:32a, 2/20/26
DiabloWags said:
BearlySane88 said:
DiabloWags said:
BearlySane88 said:
It's not all about you. I was speaking on the government and your country losing money.



How is the Country losing money on something that was NOT LEGAL in the first place?
Please explain.


"The U.S. Treasury is gonna be busy cutting a lot of checks.

Between $133 - $175 Billion."
-Wags 2/20/2026


I repeat: The money that the U.S. Treasury took in was NOT LEGAL IN THE FIRST PLACE.

The Supreme Court of the United States of America just said so.




Nobody here is arguing against that..?

Reply Quote
3
bearister
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:34a, 2/20/26
The SCOTUS Rubber Stamp malfunctioned.

Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside

“I love Cal deeply, by the way, what are the directions to The Portal from Sproul Plaza?”
Reply Quote
4
DiabloWags
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:38a, 2/20/26
Trump called the ruling by the conservative high court a DISGRACE.

Trump and Bessent said that if SCOTUS overturned the tariffs it would be DEVASTATING for our country.

Yet, the yields on U.S. Treasuries have barely budged today.
The Treasury bond market is relatively calm.

Meanwhile, this is what Trump's former VP had to say:




Cults don't end well. They really don't.
Reply Quote
6
3 edits
calpoly
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to tequila4kapp • 9:26a, 2/20/26
tequila4kapp said:
DiabloWags said:
tequila4kapp said:
In my humble opinion this may end up being the single most consequential decision from SCOTUS during Trump's 8 years. A hallmark of Trump is that he has used the economic might of our economy (via tariffs) to achieve foreign policy and international economic objectives. It was IMO one of the most overlooked and brilliant moves by a President in recent times. Unfortunately, it was also illegal.


Perhaps it hasn't been used in "recent times" due to the fact that most know that it's illegal.
Tariffs in "recent times" have only been used when it comes to "dumping of product" in our market.

ie.) Bush's tariff on imported steel in March of 2002 that got lifted in December of 2003.

2002 United States steel tariff - Wikipedia

That isn't my point. Virtually every international achievement has come at the hands of tariffs. Not long drawn out diplomacy. Not threat of military action. Without tariffs NATO would still be paying less than 2%, we'd have the terribly one sided trade deals with most of the world and we'd probably have some number of dead service members.

I fully understand your and other's objections to them as a tax. We got a lot of benefit from that tax.

International achievement is hard and should not be done by extortion but that is the only way trump can make deals. He does not have the mental capacity to actually negotiate.
Reply Quote
6
DiabloWags
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to calpoly • 9:32a, 2/20/26
calpoly said:
tequila4kapp said:
DiabloWags said:
tequila4kapp said:
In my humble opinion this may end up being the single most consequential decision from SCOTUS during Trump's 8 years. A hallmark of Trump is that he has used the economic might of our economy (via tariffs) to achieve foreign policy and international economic objectives. It was IMO one of the most overlooked and brilliant moves by a President in recent times. Unfortunately, it was also illegal.


Perhaps it hasn't been used in "recent times" due to the fact that most know that it's illegal.
Tariffs in "recent times" have only been used when it comes to "dumping of product" in our market.

ie.) Bush's tariff on imported steel in March of 2002 that got lifted in December of 2003.

2002 United States steel tariff - Wikipedia

That isn't my point. Virtually every international achievement has come at the hands of tariffs. Not long drawn out diplomacy. Not threat of military action. Without tariffs NATO would still be paying less than 2%, we'd have the terribly one sided trade deals with most of the world and we'd probably have some number of dead service members.

I fully understand your and other's objections to them as a tax. We got a lot of benefit from that tax.

International achievement is hard and should not be done by extortion but that is the only way trump can make deals. He does not have the mental capacity to actually negotiate.


BINGO.

TRUMP EVEN EXTORTS MEMBERS OF OUR OWN CONGRESS

Cults don't end well. They really don't.
Reply Quote
6
1 edit
BearlySane88
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to calpoly • 9:34a, 2/20/26
Using leverage doesn't equate to extortion. You really think all countries aren't leveraging what they can in diplomatic relations?
Reply Quote
3
1 edit
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.