US Supreme Court rules Trump's tariffs without legal basis

  • Thread starter Thread starter x65943
  • Start date Start date
  • Views Views 3,307
  • Replies Replies 39
  • Likes Likes 4
  • Friendly reminder: The politics section is a place where a lot of differing opinions are raised. You may not like what you read here but it is someone's opinion. As long as the debate is respectful you are free to debate freely. Also, the views and opinions expressed by forum members may not necessarily reflect those of GBAtemp. Messages that the staff consider offensive or inflammatory may be removed in line with existing forum terms and conditions. Saying NO to fascists/nazis - if you are one of those, you are not welcome here
Voting brought him into power and out of power once already

Don't spread the false notion that it's meaningless
How did that Simpsons episode go where those two presidential candidates were evil aliens again?

Marge: Why are we building a death ray aimed at another planet?
Homer: don't blame me...I voted Kodos!

Sure, both parties aren't exactly similar anymore since then, but it also highlights how just those elections are accepted by most as "enough to warrant being a democracy".
 
1000018883.jpg


People here voted for this guy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Xzi
It's a lot of young people thinking like that which allows older people to vote in bullshit year after year

If you don't think Biden was an improvement over Trump then perhaps you are just really really pro federal troops in cities
Ain't I older than you?
 
The US has trade deficit for 50 years now (it started in mid 1970s, few years after oil crisis), so no tariffs are going to fix the trade deficit and Trump would find himself to see deficit grow bigger under his watch.

The trade surplus is dream pipe for the US nowadays.

The low birth rate is going to cause the labor shortage, so if companies can't find enough workers, so bye bye to factories. The US would be greatly depends on India, Vietnam, Central America and China for next 50 years.
 
The US has trade deficit for 50 years now (it started in mid 1970s, few years after oil crisis), so no tariffs are going to fix the trade deficit and Trump would find himself to see deficit grow bigger under his watch.

The trade surplus is dream pipe for the US nowadays.

The low birth rate is going to cause the labor shortage, so if companies can't find enough workers, so bye bye to factories. The US would be greatly depends on India, Vietnam, Central America and China for next 50 years.
China has bigger population problems than the us
 
  • Like
Reactions: Moe87
China has bigger population problems than the us
When I wrote my post, I debated myself about whether to include China in next 50 years and yeah, China will have massive demographic crisis in the future, but I felt that China likely to have enough workers at factories but not much as India, Vietnam and others.

Rural areas in China would be emptied out as some cities lose the population that is akin to Detroit after 1950s. Shanghai, Beijing, Guangzhou and Shenzhen likely to maintain the same or growing population. Northeast China, formerly Manchuria will see very significant population loss to become extremely supersized Detroit-Gary-East St. Louis.

All bets are off if China invades Taiwan because it is very financial and political suicide for China, so loss would be more severe.
 
  • Like
Reactions: x65943
Heh... Here's something I never thought I'd say:

Hey Trump... Thanks for your Greenland tantrum. :D

That's irony, not sarcasm. Why? Because the EU was about to sign a trade deal that essentially read "we give in to your extortion". Because of the eu not giving in on his ridiculous Greenland 'request', he started muttering new tariffs. To which the eu held off actually signing anything to get lower tariffs.

... Which now turns out to be the best course of action regardless. But plenty of other countries made deals under the pretext that those tariffs were imposed by the USA. Now that those are deemed illegal, those are stuck in limbo.

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/02/22/business/trump-tariffs-japan-indonesia.html

Sure, he threatens replacements, but iirc those are only temporary. And worse: since they're equally imposed on all countries (and lower than those semi random numbers) , there isn't leverage to follow through anymore.

I knew it was going to be a mess when people and companies would come demanding their money back (which they are), but it's a mess with those brokered deals as well. I've read opinions(within Belgium) wondering why we'd trade anything with usa in a situation like this. Not as a pipe dream but on the genuine ground that it's a crapshot on how much anything is going to cost. Sure, we still don't pay the bulk of the tariff, but why would we split anything when we can just say "that's our price... As a customer YOU deal with how much your government taxes you for it"?


And to the surprise of nobody, the republican fan club isn't sharing opinions. Can't blame them: this ruling is essentially saying that these import taxes should be gone, and vice legal reason to sue the government if you've bought something from elsewhere.
 
The US has trade deficit for 50 years now (it started in mid 1970s, few years after oil crisis), so no tariffs are going to fix the trade deficit and Trump would find himself to see deficit grow bigger under his watch.

The trade surplus is dream pipe for the US nowadays.

The low birth rate is going to cause the labor shortage, so if companies can't find enough workers, so bye bye to factories. The US would be greatly depends on India, Vietnam, Central America and China for next 50 years.
Immigration was a net safety to labor shortage.Orange Pedo and Hanafuda dislike it.
 
Immigration was a net safety to labor shortage.Orange Pedo and Hanafuda dislike it.
Yes but there is good news - Trump would be out of office on Jan 20, 2029 and next new president can loosen the immigration law to increase the labor supply.

I expect a next democrat president to dismantle all of Trump's policies instantly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AncientBoi
How did that Simpsons episode go where those two presidential candidates were evil aliens again?

Marge: Why are we building a death ray aimed at another planet?
Homer: don't blame me...I voted Kodos!

Sure, both parties aren't exactly similar anymore since then, but it also highlights how just those elections are accepted by most as "enough to warrant being a democracy".
Thank you for the trip down memory lane!



EDIT: Any resemblence between our current situation and a cartoon from 30 years ago is PURELY COINCIDENTAL fml
 
Heh... Here's something I never thought I'd say:

Hey Trump... Thanks for your Greenland tantrum. :D

That's irony, not sarcasm. Why? Because the EU was about to sign a trade deal that essentially read "we give in to your extortion". Because of the eu not giving in on his ridiculous Greenland 'request', he started muttering new tariffs. To which the eu held off actually signing anything to get lower tariffs.

... Which now turns out to be the best course of action regardless. But plenty of other countries made deals under the pretext that those tariffs were imposed by the USA. Now that those are deemed illegal, those are stuck in limbo.

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/02/22/business/trump-tariffs-japan-indonesia.html

Sure, he threatens replacements, but iirc those are only temporary. And worse: since they're equally imposed on all countries (and lower than those semi random numbers) , there isn't leverage to follow through anymore.

I knew it was going to be a mess when people and companies would come demanding their money back (which they are), but it's a mess with those brokered deals as well. I've read opinions(within Belgium) wondering why we'd trade anything with usa in a situation like this. Not as a pipe dream but on the genuine ground that it's a crapshot on how much anything is going to cost. Sure, we still don't pay the bulk of the tariff, but why would we split anything when we can just say "that's our price... As a customer YOU deal with how much your government taxes you for it"?


And to the surprise of nobody, the republican fan club isn't sharing opinions. Can't blame them: this ruling is essentially saying that these import taxes should be gone, and vice legal reason to sue the government if you've bought something from elsewhere.
Somewhat of a bump (and quoting my past self)...

The current situation is like a rerun of late february, except there's now a war playing in the background. It was mentioned that Trump threatened new tariffs to replace the old ones...but now these are deemed illegal as well.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/poli...-struck-down-by-a-panel-of-judges/ar-AA22DFYH

There's a good handfull of large companies effectively making claims of returns, fully expecting to be paid back. Meanwhile, Trump relied on the income of these tariffs to fund ICE, so it's essentially already spent. Which begs the question: is America going broke?
...Yeah, okay: you can't really go broke if you hold the money press of the most valuable currency in the world. Lemme rephrase: is the reign of the dollar going to end due to this?
(don't get me started on how the US now needs to borrow TRILLIONS just to keep the current standard of living)

But there's more deja vu. In a latenight tantrum, Trump imposed a new sanction on the EU car industry because he didn't like the progress they were making.
...to which Von Der Leyen now essentially considers it proof that any US "deal" isn't worth the paper it's written on. Oh, she phrases it as something akin to "first we need proof that any deal we make will be honored". But that in itself tells you enough. Heck...asking Donald Trump to grow wings sounds more likely than Trump honoring a deal he makes.
 

Site & Scene News

Popular threads in this forum