Tariff ruling.

[HikerGuy83]

+161 at moment. I imagine the markets anticipated this ruling.

They were there before that.

What you imagine does not matter to anyone.

In essence they are neutral to this ruling.

 

[candycorn]

Out of control, crony Supreme... wait. What?

Can we finally agree that Trump doesn't own the SCOTUS and that whole narrative was complete BS?

I’ve always said that the SCOTUS has a way of moderating itself. That being said, anyone with two working brain cells would question some of the rulings. I don’t see how the government can force you to buy insurance (as they did with the ACA which was upheld by the court) any more than they can say that money=speech as was upheld by the court.

 

[22lcidw]

Optimizing trade agreements is a great idea. Always.

And all of this, ALL of it, could have been done professionally, intelligently, constructively, respectfully and effectively behind closed doors.

ALL OF IT.

But no, these people have no idea whatsoever how to do that. They are modern-day Neanderthals.

Just another embarrassment.

If it was not for living off of slaves like in China, who are more educated even, we would not have the destruction going on here with you Progs. As the years go on, China gets stronger and stronger. Meanwhile we have DEI and extreme feminists destroying our nation. Regionalism and tribal ways of living are slowly coming into place. You see Minneapolis and other Prog cities as an example in recent years. To destroy railroad tracks and highways entering your cities will be prudent one day for survival. Since food, consumer products, mineral materials and energy come from those hated Deplorable environs we can see even more potential denials to you. Domestic trade agreements will ramp up. We will see how much you like paying a few times more for the things you enjoy today. Great ideas.

 

[candycorn]

And the fuckin' orange circus continues. Fortunately I'm pretty much numb to this now.

Do American companies sue to get their goddamn money back now?

That would seem to be the next logical step. If the taxes were improperly layed and collected (sounds dirty)...the remedy would be a full refund.

 

[Mac1958]

The administration has noted that they would be on the hook for refunds. Not much on that yet.

I do wonder how they convinced themselves and each other that the Supes wouldn't rule against them.

Trump probably just figured they'd bend over. This one was a pretty easy decision, and most saw it coming.

 

[pknopp]

I’ve always said that the SCOTUS has a way of moderating itself. That being said, anyone with two working brain cells would question some of the rulings. I don’t see how the government can force you to buy insurance (as they did with the ACA which was upheld by the court) any more than they can say that money=speech as was upheld by the court.

The forced buying insurance was fixed which is often the courts standing. The often argue to stop making them make the rules. But yeah, I agree Roberts was wrong.

 

[candycorn]

Yeah. **** you.

Everyone else can impose tariffs on us but we can't reciprocate.

The reason for this crazy belief is because most of congress is robbing us blind and is being blackmailed by leftists who hate America.

 

[Mac1958]

That would seem to be the next logical step. If the taxes were improperly layed and collected (sounds dirty)...the remedy would be a full refund.

This would be a massive mess.

Trump vs. American Businesses. Gee, that's a great look.

 

[berg80]

I've stated in the past that despite everything else, most times they get it right. Most times.

But not the Roberts court.

 

[MarathonMike]

So much for Trump Haters caterwauling over the Supreme Court being in TRUMP'S POCKET.

 

[candycorn]

The forced buying insurance was fixed which is often the courts standing.

If I understand it correctly, the feds just stopped enforcing that part of the law or overturned it.

The often argue to stop making them make the rules. But yeah, I agree Roberts was wrong.

That is the problem...laws of taxes and pocketbook issues need to come from somewhere. Theorhetically, the pillars that allowed the justices to make the ruling in the first place that you have to buy health insurance or that money=speech are still there.

Speaking of which, since I just wrote a speech...you owe me some money. Pay up.

 

[mudwhistle]

I do wonder how they convinced themselves and each other that the Supes wouldn't rule against them.

Trump probably just figured they'd bend over. This one was a pretty easy decision, and most saw it coming.

Only if you think they are correct in saying a tariff is a tax.

I don't believe it is.

If it was a tax it would be called a tax.

 

[mudwhistle]

This would be a massive mess.

Trump vs. American Businesses. Gee, that's a great look.

Uh....WTF are you talking about now?

 

[JimH52]

WOULD NOT be around The Felon at this time. He is probably kicking a dog or throwing his Coke against a wall.

 

[pknopp]

If I understand it correctly, the feds just stopped enforcing that part of the law or overturned it.

It was changed by Congress.

That is the problem...laws of taxes and pocketbook issues need to come from somewhere. Theorhetically, the pillars that allowed the justices to make the ruling in the first place that you have to buy health insurance or that money=speech are still there.

Speaking of which, since I just wrote a speech...you owe me some money. Pay up.

Two bits?

 

[Montrovant]

Suddenly the SCOTUS seems to have turned against America...in spite of a conservative majority.
Best guess.....they, and their families have been made "offers they cannot refuse".

It's HIGHLY suspicious that ALL NINE JUSTICES suddenly vote with the liberals with no dissent.
Just a few days ago they UNANIMOUSLY voted to dilute the 4th amendment by giving Police very broad and sweeping powers to enter private homes with no warrant and no probable cause (see Case v Montana, February 2006 ruling)

They seem to be preparing to make some unprecedented and even shocking 2nd Amendment rulings that could obliterate the 2nd.

HUGE victory laps over at the HQ for the Communist party of America.

This ruling was 6-3.

The Case v Montana ruling seems to have just upheld both prior USSC decisions and the lower court rulings. It's hard to say the court diluted the 4th Amendment with the Case decision when it was reaffirming the 2006 Brigham City v Stuart decision.

I don't know what you mean that they are "preparing to make some unprecedented and even shocking 2nd Amendment rulings." What gives you that impression?

As far as the tariff ruling, I don't have any issue with it on first glance. The emergency powers exception was always an incredibly thin excuse and clearly seemed like the executive trying to gather more power to itself. While that is nothing new (it seems as if the executive has been trying to increase its power from the very beginning), I am certainly not opposed to the occasional check on executive power.

The administration can still use other laws to levy tariffs, it just can't do it so quickly and easily with the threadbare 'emergency' excuse.

 

[mudwhistle]

If I understand it correctly, the feds just stopped enforcing that part of the law or overturned it.


That is the problem...laws of taxes and pocketbook issues need to come from somewhere. Theorhetically, the pillars that allowed the justices to make the ruling in the first place that you have to buy health insurance or that money=speech are still there.

Speaking of which, since I just wrote a speech...you owe me some money. Pay up.

We didn't hire you to write a speech.....so tough shit.

 

[22lcidw]

If I understand it correctly, the feds just stopped enforcing that part of the law or overturned it.


That is the problem...laws of taxes and pocketbook issues need to come from somewhere. Theorhetically, the pillars that allowed the justices to make the ruling in the first place that you have to buy health insurance or that money=speech are still there.

Speaking of which, since I just wrote a speech...you owe me some money. Pay up.

So, if prices drop near term that would be good for Trump.

 

[Rogue AI]

The administration has noted that they would be on the hook for refunds. Not much on that yet.

How can they be? If that were the case the Court should have frozen Trump's ability, legislated by Congress from the start. Instead the Court did nothing and created a problem they have no Constitutional authority to remedy. Totally ridiculous.

 

[candycorn]

This would be a massive mess.

Trump vs. American Businesses. Gee, that's a great look.

The remedy is to get a full refund.

The political reality is that few if any are going to ask for a penny in compensation. Why? Because for the next 3 years, these companies need to get permission to breathe from the government. Look at how the DOJ turned CBS inside out because of a stand-up comic.

Paramount (if they were an importer) isn’t going to get back in the ring with the feds. I doubt any of these companies want to get on the blob’s bad-side or their next M&A will be delayed.