Trump has seven other tariff options. What are they?
Trump Slams Supreme Court Ruling
Please note Trump Blames Loss on ‘Political’ Supreme Court Justices
President Trump blamed his Supreme Court loss on “political” justices, saying it should have been obvious that he would prevail.
“I read everything there is to read. And I said, ‘Can’t lose this case.’ But we can when judges are political, when they want to be politically correct, when they’re catering to a group of people in D.C.,” he said.
When asked if the justices were still invited to his State of the Union address next week, Trump said they were— some of them, “barely.”
“Honestly I couldn’t care less if they come,” he said.
Trump had particularly harsh words for Supreme Court justices Amy Coney Barrett and Neil Gorsuch. He did not say whether he regretted appointing the pair, but called the decision “an embarrassment to their families.”
Was Politics in Play?
Trump is correct. Politics was in play. The ruling should have been unanimous against his tariffs.
The justices should all decline the “barely invited” invitation to what is sure to be a nonsensical State of the Union Address.
Trump Tariffs the Supreme Court
Trump Vows Replacement 10 Percent Tariff
The Wall Street Journal reports Trump Slams Supreme Court Ruling, Vows New 10% Tariffs
President Trump will impose a 10% global tariff under a different authority to replace those thrown out by the Supreme Court on Friday, saying he was “ashamed of certain members of the court” over the ruling.
The new 10% global tariff would be “over and above our normal tariffs already being charged,” Trump said. “We have alternatives,” the president said. “Great alternatives.”
The new tariffs will be imposed under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, Trump said, which allows the president to impose tariffs for up to 150 days. During that time, Trump said they would also begin new tariff investigations under Section 301 of the Trade Act, which can result in more permanent tariffs.
Trump Says He Doesn’t Need Congress Approval for Tariffs
Finally, please consider President Says He Doesn’t Need Congress Approval for Tariffs
President Trump said he doesn’t plan to ask Congress to approve his new tariff plan.
“I don’t need to, it’s already been approved,” Trump said.
The Supreme Court ruling found that Trump’s original tariff plan exceeded his authority without authorization from Congress.
Trump does need approval from Congress for some actions as the Supreme Court just ruled.
Trump Rant and Rebuttal Comment
Shifting Goal Posts
Gee. Who couldda thought?
Tariff Option Fact Check
Since Trump is prone to lie, we need a fact check on his claim about Congressional approval.
Trump’s Other Options
- Section 232(b) of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962. Section 232(b) provides for the imposition of tariffs or quotas on imports that threaten to impair U.S. national security. Investigations may be self-initiated by the Department of Commerce (Commerce). They may also be initiated based on an application from an interested party or at the request of the head of another U.S. government agency. If Commerce finds that imports of a particular product or products threaten to impair U.S. national security, the president decides whether to impose tariffs or quotas on such imports.
- Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974. This statute authorizes the president to impose quotas and tariffs of as much as 15 percent for up to 150 days against one or more countries that have “large and serious” balance-of-payment surpluses with the United States.
- Section 201 of the Trade Act of 1974. Section 201 permits the president to impose tariffs or quotas on imports of a particular product where there has been a surge of imports of that product. To have tariffs or quotas imposed under Section 201, the import surge must constitute a substantial cause of serious injury to the U.S. industry producing the product in question.
- Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974. Under Section 301, upon a finding that another country has denied the United States its rights under a trade agreement or has engaged in practices that are unjustifiable, unreasonable or discriminatory and burden or restrict U.S. commerce, the United States may impose tariffs and quotas against the foreign country’s imports. Section 301 investigations are conducted by the U.S. Trade Representative’s Office, which has the authority to impose duties and quotas and to suspend benefits granted to the United States’ trading partners under trade agreements.
- The Trading With the Enemy Act (TWEA) and the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977 (IEEPA). TWEA and IEEPA authorize the president to regulate all forms of international commerce and freeze assets in time of war (TWEA) or in response to “unusual or extraordinary” international threats to the national security, foreign policy or economy of the United States (IEEPA).
- Anti-Dumping and Countervailing Duty Laws. Upon a finding that a U.S. industry is being “materially injured” or threatened with material injury by dumped or subsidized imports, the United States can impose anti-dumping (AD) or countervailing (CVD) duties to offset the level of dumping or subsidization that is occurring. Investigations may be initiated in response to a petition from a domestic industry or union, or may be self-initiated by Commerce. A number of industries have successfully brought investigations under these laws in recent years to address injury being caused by unfairly traded imports, and the brisk pace of cases and investigations is expected to continue as numerous industries continue to face overcapacity and other structural issues arising from subsidization and government intervention in markets.
- Enforcement of Existing AD/CVD Orders and U.S. Customs Laws. Companies importing into the United States also should expect increased enforcement of existing AD and CVD orders as well as other requirements of the U.S. customs laws. Among other areas, U.S. Customs and Border Protection can be expected to increase enforcement actions against imports suspected of evading AD and CVD duties under the recently enacted Enforce and Protect Act of 2015 and other grants of enforcement authority
The above seven points are from a 2017 article on US Trade Policy and Enforcement
Here are some issues based on reading additional links including the Trade Act of 1974
Trade Act of 1974 – Section 122
Section 122 only allows 15 percent and only for 150 days.
SEC. 122. BALANCE-OF-PAYMENTS AUTHORITY.
(a) Whenever fundamental international payments problems require special import measures to restrict imports—
(1) to deal with large and serious United States balance of-payments deficits,
(2) to prevent an imminent and significant depreciation of
the dollar in foreign exchange markets, or
(3) to cooperate with other countries in correcting an international balance-of-payments disequilibrium,
the President shall proclaim, for a period not exceeding, for a period not exceeding 150 days (unless such period is extended by Act of Congress)—
(A) a temporary import surcharge, not to exceed 15 percent ad valorem, in the form of duties (in addition to those already imposed, if any) on articles imported into the United States;
(B) temporary limitations through the use of quotas on the importation of articles into the United States; or
(C) both a temporary import surcharge described in subparagraph (A) and temporary limitations described in subparagraph (B).The authority delegated under subparagraph (B) (and so much of subparagraph (C) as relates to subparagraph (B)) may be exercised (i) only if international trade or monetary agreements to which the United States is a party permit the imposition of quotas as a balance-of-payments measure, and (ii) only to the extent that the fundamental imbalance cannot be dealt with effectively by a surcharge proclaimed pursuant to subparagraph (A) or (C). Any temporary
import surcharge proclaimed pursuant to subparagraph (A) or (C) shall be treated as a regular customs duty.
Trade Act of 1974 – Section 201
SEC. 201. ACTION TO FACILITATE POSITIVE ADJUSTMENT TO IMPORT COMPETITION. (a) PRESIDENTIAL ACTION.—If the United States International Trade Commission (ITC) (hereinafter referred to in this chapter as the ‘‘Commission’’) determines under section 202(b) that an article is being imported into the United States in such increased quantities as to be a substantial cause of serious injury, or the threat thereof, to the domestic industry producing an article like or directly competitive with the imported article, the President, in accordance with this chapter, shall take all appropriate and feasible action within his power which the President determines will facilitate efforts by the domestic industry to make a positive adjustment to import competition and provide greater economic and social benefits than costs.
Section 201 includes a 150-day review period. It requires the ITC to examine factors other than imports which may be a cause of serious injury, or threat of serious injury, to the domestic industry. It requires “clear evidence that increased imports (either actual or relative to domestic production) of the article are a substantial cause of serious injury, or the threat thereof, to the domestic industry producing an article like or directly competitive with the imported article …”
Amusingly only three of six positions of this bipartisan commission are currently filled, two of which are Democrats.
The USITC is headed by six Commissioners who are nominated by the President and confirmed by the U.S. Senate. No more than three Commissioners may be of any one political party. Currently two Democrats and one Republican serve as Commissioners.
Trade Act of 1974 – Section 301
(1) If the United States Trade Representative determines under section 304(a)(1) that— (A) the rights of the United States under any trade agreement are being denied; or (B) an act, policy, or practice of a foreign country— (i) violates, or is inconsistent with, the provisions of, or otherwise denies benefits to the United States under, any trade agreement, or (ii) is unjustifiable and burdens or restricts United States commerce; the Trade Representative shall take action authorized in subsection (c), subject to the specific direction, if any, of the President regarding any such action, and shall take all other appropriate and feasible action within the power of the President that the President may direct the Trade Representative to take under this subsection, to enforce such rights or to obtain the elimination of such act, policy, or practice.
(c) SCOPE OF AUTHORITY.—
(1) For purposes of carrying out the provisions of subsection (a) or (b) or section 306(c), the Trade Representative is authorized to— (A) suspend, withdraw, or prevent the application of, benefits of trade agreement concessions to carry out a trade agreement with the foreign country referred to in such subsection; (B) impose duties or other import restrictions on the goods of, and, notwithstanding any other provision of law, fees or restrictions on the services of, such foreign country for such time as the Trade Representative determines appropriate; (C) in a case in which the act, policy, or practice also fails to meet the eligibility criteria for receiving duty-free treatment under subsections (b) and (c) of section 502 of this Act, subsections (b) and (c) of section 212 of the Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act (19 U.S.C. 2702(b) and (c)), or subsections (c) and (d) of section 203 of the Andean Trade Preference Act (19 U.S.C. 3202(c) and (d)), withdraw, limit, or suspend such treatment under such provisions, notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (a)(3) of this section; or (D) enter into binding agreements with such foreign country that commit such foreign country to— (i) eliminate, or phase out, the act, policy, or practice that is the subject of the action to be taken under subsection (a) or (b),(ii) eliminate any burden or restriction on United States commerce resulting from such act, policy, or practice, or (iii) provide the United States with compensatory trade benefits that— (I) are satisfactory to the Trade Representative, and (II) meet the requirements of paragraph
[This is very complicated with section 301 referring to the above scope and also Section 304. See Conclusion Below.]
SEC. 304. DETERMINATIONS BY THE TRADE REPRESENTATIVE. (a) IN GENERAL.— (1) On the basis of the investigation initiated under section 302 and the consultations (and the proceedings, if applicable) under section 303, the Trade Representative shall— ….
(4) In any case in which a dispute is not resolved before the close of the minimum dispute settlement period provided for in a trade agreement, the Trade Representative, within 15 days after the close of such dispute settlement period, shall submit a report to Congress setting forth the reasons why the dispute was not resolved within the minimum dispute settlement period, the status of the case at the close of the period, and the prospects for resolution. For purposes of this paragraph, the minimum dispute settlement period provided for under any such trade agreement is the total period of time that results if all stages of the formal dispute settlement procedures are carried out within the time limitations specified in the agreement, but computed without regard to any extension authorized under the agreement at any stage. (b) CONSULTATION BEFORE DETERMINATIONS.— (1) Before making the determinations required under subsection (a)(1), the Trade Representative, unless expeditious action is required— (A) shall provide an opportunity (after giving not less than 30 days notice thereof) for the presentation of views by interested persons, including a public hearing if requested by any interested person, (B) shall obtain advice from the appropriate committees established pursuant to section 135, and (C) may request the views of the United States International Trade Commission regarding the probable impact on the economy of the United States of the taking of action with respect to any goods or service. (2) If the Trade Representative does not comply with the requirements of subparagraphs (A) and (B) of paragraph (1) because expeditious action is required, the Trade Representative shall, after making the determinations under subsection (a)(1), comply with such subparagraphs. (c) PUBLICATION.—The Trade Representative shall publish in the Federal Register any determination made under subsection (a)(1), together with a description of the facts on which such determination is based.
Trading With the Enemy Act (TWEA)
The TWEA pertains to the ability to freeze assets in time of war, not impose tariffs.
And we are not at war in the first place.
Anti-Dumping Laws
AI Analysis: Anti-Dumping (AD) and Countervailing Duty (CVD) laws are trade remedies allowing countries (like the U.S.) to impose extra tariffs (duties) on imported goods that are “dumped” (sold below fair value) or unfairly subsidized by foreign governments, aiming to protect domestic industries from unfair competition and injury. The process involves investigations by the Commerce Department (determining dumping/subsidy) and the International Trade Commission (determining industry injury), resulting in duties equal to the dumping margin or subsidy amount to level the playing field.
No doubt the commerce department would rule in Trump’s favor.
However, the bipartisan ITC gets to set the penalty.
Trade Expansion Act of 1962 – Section 232(b)
In practice, much if not all of the above, may prove to be useless to Trump except the Trade Expansion Act of 1962. But that’s a potential slug as well.
Section 232 Process
Under Sec. 232, the head of any department or agency, or any “interested party” may request that the Secretary of Commerce investigate the effects of a specific import on U.S. national security. The Commerce Secretary may also self-initiate an investigation. The Commerce Secretary must immediately notify the Secretary of Defense regarding any Sec. 232 investigation. If a petitioner withdraws a request, Commerce may choose to terminate an investigation.
Investigation and Report. Sec. 232 investigations are conducted by the Commerce Department’s Bureau of Industry and Security. Commerce must “immediately initiate an appropriate investigation to determine the effects [of the subject imports] on the national security”. Commerce is to consult with the Secretary of Defense, other “appropriate officers of the United States,” and allow for public input if “appropriate and after reasonable notice.” Within 270 days of initiating a Sec. 232 investigation, the Commerce Secretary must submit to the President a report on the investigation’s findings with respect to the effect of an imported good “in such quantities or under such circumstances” upon U.S. national security and recommendations for action or inaction.
2017-2021. During the first Trump Administration, Commerce completed seven Sec. 232 investigations: (1) aluminum, (2) steel, (3) automobile and automobile parts, (4) uranium, (5) titanium sponge, (6) transformers and transformer components, and (7) vanadium. In all completed investigations except for vanadium, Commerce found a threat to U.S. national security.
President Trump imposed tariffs on steel and aluminum in 2018. He later modified the steel and aluminum tariffs, granting certain product and country exemptions as well as negotiating import quotas and increasing tariff rates on specific countries and goods. For other goods, the Trump Administration entered into negotiations with trading partners. For uranium, President Trump did not concur with Commerce’s finding of a national security threat, but announced the establishment of a working group.
2021-2025. The Biden Administration conducted a Sec. 232 investigation into neodymium-iron-boron (NdFeB) permanent magnets and found a threat to U.S. national security. President Biden concurred with Commerce’s determination related to permanent magnets and announced various actions to improve supply chain resiliency.
National Security Threat
The term “national security threat,” is not defined in Sec. 232. Some groups argue that the Trump Administration’s definition, particularly related to economic factors, is overly broad, resulting in overutilization of Sec. 232. The White House asserts that “economic security is national security.” Some groups argue that Congress should play a role in defining national security threats. Others support maintaining a flexible definition of national security, arguing that it allows the United States to respond quickly to evolving threats.
Trump’s Options After the Supreme Court Said His Tariffs Are Illegal
Bloomberg discusses Trump’s Options After the Supreme Court Said His Tariffs Are Illegal I will skip the other options and focus on 301 in the summary.
Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974
What it permits:Section 301 allows the Office of the US Trade Representative (USTR), under the direction of the president, to impose tariffs in response to other nations’ trade measures it deems discriminatory to American businesses or in violation of US rights under international trade agreements. There’s no limit on the tariff rate that can be introduced.
Limitations:
Again, this avenue doesn’t enable an instant rollout of tariffs as the USTR must first conduct an investigation. The agency is generally required to request consultation with the foreign government whose trade practices are being probed, and solicit public comments, which can result in public hearings.
Section 301 investigations focus on one country, but USTR can conduct parallel reviews of a common concern that relates to multiple countries. It did so during Trump’s first term, looking at the digital services taxes of 11 jurisdictions, including France and the UK.
Previous uses:
The first Trump administration used Section 301 to impose tariffs on hundreds of billions of dollars of imports from China in 2018, following an investigation into China’s policies on technology transfer, intellectual property and innovation. Biden increased Section 301 tariffs on certain products from China, including electric vehicles, during his term.
Conclusion
It’s complicated!
Trump has gone with Section 122 followed by Section 301.
Section 122 gives Trump 150 days. Congress would be highly unlikely to extend.
I read Section 301 differently than the Wall Street Journal and Bloomberg.
Looking at the actual Trade Act of 1974, not the Bloomberg link to an interpretation, I do not see tariffs as a remedy.
Nowhere in the trade act Section 301 remedies do I see the word “tariff”. I see fees and duties. Notably, fees and duties are paid by the exporter.
It does not make any logical sense for tariffs to be a remedy because tariffs are a tax on importers, not exporters.
But don’t expect Trump to be logical. Do expect him to up the stupidity in other ways.
Finally, lower courts have upheld 301 tariffs. Given today’s ruling, that may not be the case going forward.
Related Posts
February 20, 2026: Supreme Court Strikes Trump’s Reciprocal Tariffs In 6-3 Vote (I Told You So)
Forgive me for bragging, but I got every justice correct.
February 20, 2026: Big Tariff Refunds Are Coming. How Much and How Soon?
The Supreme Court did not discuss refunds. They will be up to the Trade Court. Messy?
Trump got a well-deserved smack in the face by the Supreme Court. Two more cases are on deck and Trump will lose both.
For discussion, please see Fearless Predictions, Ten Key Events to Expect in 2026
tariff is the exclusive domain of individual sovereign nations on each other.
a collective tariff imposed by a union of nations i.e. e/u is extortion on a single sovereign is not a tariff or a tax .
there can not be a tariff “deal” between trump and the e/u .
trump made a deal with himself…made his play and europe can “deal ” with that..
strong leader ? yes
smart leader? tbd
e/u is sorrier now than before and the people living in europe suffer the consequence of voluntarily living in a union.
an unanswered tariff assigned by a collective of an unelected bureaucracy on a sovereign nation ? I don’t think so .
JD Vance is going to need a different line of work in the future as Trump fuels his adversaries more and more. He’s killed off Midterms and likely the next Election.
If Trump can kill all elections, Vance can simply ascend to the throne in 2028
I wish. It might save a lot of bloodshed.
What is most interesting, from an intellectual point of view, about this is how the authorities are going to play it. I am fascinated by the prior example of the Paris Commune of about year 1870. After a long period of hopeless incompetence in authority, France lost a war against Prussia, and the idiot Emperor Napoleon III abdicated. Paris declared itself a Communist republic. A Marshal McMahon was installed as President of France, and went to war against Paris.
What is interesting is that apparently the country boys flooded in to volunteer to fight against Paris. In that extremity, they were on the side of the authorities. I suppose they had bad family memories of rule by Paris during the French Revolution, usually dated as 1789, but with turmoil extending well beyond that.
That should be a warning to New York and its little sisters. If things get really bad, a lot of people will be on the side of the national army and the oligarchs against the bloodsucking, obnoxious cities and their lunatic social decrees. Socialism can’t work, and neither can sexual depravity in the long run.
It’s a shame that the city people aren’t grown-up enough to find common cause with the country against the oligarchs. But I don’t suppose that can ever be. Maybe the California ram-raiders and shop-lifting rings might be induced to go with the country people. They at least have enough initiative to go out and do crime, WITHOUT being part of the government.
The Russian Communist Revolution was a victory for the urban workers against the peasants. The Chinese Communist Revolution was a victory for the peasants against the oligarchy.
Bad Timing: Liberation Day 1.1 (LD 1.1)will start on 12:01 EST 24 Feb 2026. Liberation Day 1.0 (LD 1.0) started on 2 April 2025.
LD 1.0 occurred on day 240 of a 27 Oct 2023 120/240 of 243 1st and 2nd fractal series with nonlinear lower lows on days 241 and 242 and a final low on 7 April 2025.
LD 1.1 will start on day 47 of a 20 Nov 2025 19/48 day 1st and 2nd fractal series. True, True, and unrelated 2nd fractal nonlinearity (in equities, crypto, and precious metals) will again occur with LD 1.1.
As a non-American from a country which enjoys a significant trade surplus with the US I sure hope that the Trump admin will be prevented in any way to impose tariffs and that the US will be forced to reimburse them.
And most Americans will be cheering for that together with me… LMAO
Not complicated at all. Supreme court essentially closed the front window and opened the back door. The supreme court judgement boils down to “checking the wrong box.” Plenty of tariff options available. I’ll take the Bessent over internet blog guy any day.
[Extremely long and detailed explanation of why Trump’s options are limited from someone who’s been posting about macroeconomics for 20+ years and has a book]
“Hurr durr uhhhmmm…. Me no likey!”
Yet here you are, haypenny
The next 150 days will be interesting ones. Department of Trade has to
1/ finish negotiations with some 100 states (the others are too small) and sign trade agreements. Not easy – time consuming and Trump’s nuclear weapon (reciprocal tariffs) has been disabled.
2/ Defend in several hundred (some one wrote 1600) cases where federal government is sued by US importers over illegal collection of reciprocal tariffs. Or not defend, issue fresh T-Bills and next rate cut.
3/ Prepare a set of new tariffs under 201, 232 and 301 sections. Again, this requires lots of paper work.
4/ Review USMCA and negotiate changes. Or blow it up which only requires president to make a 1 minute statement in WH and go into trade war with Mexico and Canada.
Quite a lot of things to do. If DoT staff starts burning out and quitting …
I think a lot of the staffers at the Treasury Department have either been forced out or took a buyout in the past year. Tax code enforcement will be lower than usual this tax year. The Chinese must be rubbing their hands with glee as chaos reigns in DC.
I’m guessing that IRS doesn’t have a lot of staff.
10% tariff = 10% import tax paid by the importer.
It’s that simple and it is inflationary.
Add it to increasing health care, child care and insurance costs and you have justification for gold and silver to resume their run-up. Both closed at their highs of the week and gold had its first ever weekly close above $5,100.
$180 billion in refunds + interest might be the impetus for yet another credit downgrade of US debt.
It’s not IF, it’s WHEN…
Someone is buying large volumes of (out of the money call options) on gold being above $10,000 by December 2026.
P.S.The Shanghai Lunar New Year celebration trading cessation ends fully on the 24th. Expect fireworks in the metals markets from gold to copper as physical demand returns. China’s power grid expansion is creating extreme demand.
70% of the US electrical grid is outdated and lead times for power transformers and switchgear are over a year.
thanks again frosty. “Gold is the money of kings, silver is the money of gentlemen, barter is the money of peasants, but debt is the money of slaves.” – Norm Franz.
2026-27: Old Corn Pop™ and his box of parrots go sideways and hit a pole
to make this long post short!
NO A SINGLE SANE BUSINESSMAN WOULD INVEST SUBSTANTIAL MONEY ON LONG TERM INTO USA W/ such political climate!
=President Trump blamed his Supreme Court loss on “political” justices
did he not appoint 3 out of during 1st term?
does he HAVE DEMENTIA? i think so
Yeah, it’s time to stop electing 80 year olds….isn’t retirement age like 65? I mean really?? I’m in my 60’s have have been known to walk out the door with two different shoes ;-))
Trump Slams Supreme Court, Orders New 10 Percent Tariffs
=======
basically TRUMP DOESN’T GIVE A FLYING F11UCK ABOUT getting back industries!
he just need leverage to put on other =SMALLER=countries.
USA is still 25*30 world GDP!
and he just loves his own image of strong/powerful figure.
YOU KNOW = GRAB THEM BY PUS11SY=
it seems it is clear NOW!
jesus!!
alx
i believe our culture is degraded enough by nihilist warmongers, where even our elite speak with vulgarities in public, it is ok, to type out the george carlin 7 cuss words you can’t say on teeeeveeee.
But remember, Trump is a one trick, one person, pony. He will leave the stage one way or another, just like Adolph. What will his supporters be like when hes no longer around? The biggest, most amazing, incredible, back to normal in HISTORY!!!!!
I think Im getting better at predictions when it comes to the don. First, the more we talk about tariffs, the more the world will see Trump as a loser. So dont be surprised if the talk about tariffs starts to disappear, just like fentanyl disappeared once Venezuela was invaded. Also, within one or two months, hes gonna start talking about taking Cuba. Greenland has left the building, and Putin will be too busy with his reconstruction of the Soviet Union to care, and Xi will also be busy with dominating Asia. I swear if Cuba comes up very soon, I will be amazed at my ability to read this goof.
I had last posted this on January 13 \\\
The law is obvious and clear on it’s face, and there is no other outcome
Unfortunately the Supreme Court failed to issue the stay – that was an error on their part – this has always belonged in Congress/Senate and should be there now
By not issuing a stay – they left confusion and really no language on direction
This was a grave mistake by the Supreme Court – for now Trump as you know is taking alternative measures – they could easily have issued a 90 day stay and said No Refunds if Congress validates the current tarriffs
———————————————
—————————– January 13, 2026
US SUPREME COURT RULING ON TARIFFS
SCOTUS rules tariffs are unauthorized under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act
(IEEPA) Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 U.S. 579; 1952
ISSUES A STAY (90-120 day) for congressional action – Congress approves the tariffs
8:33 PM · Jan 13, 2026
US SUPREME COURT RULING ON TARIFFS SCOTUS II
Unauthorized under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co
STAY VALIDITY Smith v. Spizzirri (2024) STAYS
preservation of status quo
Rule 41 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure
US SUPREME COURT RULING ON TARIFFS
PART III
Unauthorized – Stay Issued
Preserves the status quo temporarily
Enabling refunds ONLY if Congress fails to act
Shifting tariff authority toward legislature – Congress and Senate
Where it belongs
.Congress will act
Stock markets love this nonsense, Nasdaq up over 200 points . Well done Teflon Taffif Man.
dead cat bounce!
we are going crash after elections
As a reminder to all that are paying attention to the staging of the Iran invasion.
China and Russia have sent warships into the Red Sea, Persian Gulf and straight of Hormuz. Additionally, dozens of Chinese and Russian heavy lift supply aircraft have been landing in Tehran.
The chances of an incident or false flag event triggering serious war is increasing by the hour as suddenly Irans allies are stepping up. This situation is quite unlike the last time Trump bombed Iran and called it a total success and declared their nuclear program was totally destroyed.
For non-MAGA literate souls it is quite like watching a spoiled toddler roaming the White House with a loaded machine gun.
Why The Fuck is this criminal lunatic free and at large?
biden was no better. god knows who was in command then!
Time for more goyim to be sacrificed for their master in the middle east.
Section 122 allows 150 days of tariffs against one or more nations that have substantial trade imbalances with the US.
How he intends to use this as a “Blanket 10% tariff” on all trade does not appear to be within the scope of section 122.
Particularly since he recently claimed that the trade imbalance just went down by 78%.
Trump is delusional and unfit for office.
Add that to 34x convicted felon, insurrectionist, election interference criminal, pedophile, rapist, liar fan fraud…
IMO of course
Can I buy a new Chinese made car without the 100% tariff now?
funny USA more and more looks like USSR
during USSR times there were myriad excuses why western s11hit was way better
one of was IT WAS DONE BY SLAVES! true story!
We have a checks and balance system for a reason. Too bad that nobody seems to have managed to teach Donald Trump the principles of the US Constitution.
Still better than Biden trying to scam the tax payers by forgiving student loans
This is hilarious! Is there a silent sarc tag? Reminds me of Poe’s Law.
As expensive and IMO Inappropriate as it was: Forgiveness of student loans would have benefitted many Americans and allowed them to buy homes and start families.
And it would have resulted in those families being allowed to join in the American Dream. Instead Trump is spending trillions on war and death while starving Americans and rewarding bug corporations with tax breaks.
Ice concentration camps being bought from Russian companies for $100 million over market? That’s Trump, I’d take Biden or Harris any day and I’m a Republican.
Former Republican… I have no party…
WHAT took so long. i only vote libertarian or green for national offices……….for past few decades. lesser of 2 evils is still evil. why not vote NOT EVIL parties. the state and county and city level representatives is another whole story where the reds and blues do some good like water, sewer, garbage………….stewardship for the communities………..the best form of government is weak at the federal level. switzerland is a modern example. so is the EU in many ways.
What about the fact that the students were scammed in the first place by the colleges? I think all these “educational” institutions should be paying damages for their fraudulent courses, AND paying people for the time that they induced them to waste hanging around these places.
The years that are forced to be wasted in schools and colleges are some of the most important years of everyone’s lives.
Congress has abrogated their responsibilities for the past forty years to the executive branch and bureaucratic agencies. This has manifested itself into an absolute disaster which is most apparent to us now in this presidency as well as those that preceded it. The ceding of congressional power mirrors the transition of republic to imperial rule which transformed ancient Rome to autocracy. The only avenue to pullback from this debacle is through impeachment- perhaps sequential. Can congress manifest the courage to do what is right for this republic? Big money says no.
Lobbying the Congress is also bad.Its mere corruption.
I wish I could say it won’t matter but he can still fork things up pretty good and he doesn’t even need to try hard. Having said that though, this administration is done. Trump has 1065 days left in office, sounds like a long time but it’s a flash in the pan.
SCOTUS has just castrated Trump’s entire tariff scheme and it can’t recover from the mess it’s made.
Only thing left to do is watch out for the crash and things are building:
256 days for midterms, not that Dems taking Congress will solve anything but slow down the circus.
You are reaping what you sowed suckers.
Investors pour into European stocks as part of a Hedge America strategy
https://www.semafor.com/newsletter/02/20/2026/semafor-flagship-growing-complexity?utm_source=nowshare&utm_medium=flagship&utm_campaign=flagshipnumbered3#d
Wish I could agree that he and everyone on his team wont do A LOT of damage in the next thousand days. But I don’t think this will be a flash in the pan. Maybe a nuclear flash.
As per Hal Turner ,in his radio Show, Insiders are selling.
Who is going to stand up to this deranged and embarrassing, self-appointed king tyrant? Let’s hope the Supreme Court is not the first and the last.
It is time to stand up for what is right for the USA and forget political parties.
from Nov 2025 The Right-Wing Legal Movement Made Trump a KingJohn Roberts created a monster.
https://prospect.org/2025/11/21/right-wing-legal-movement-trump-roberts/
Mark Burnett had a lot to do with it too.
So did all the regarded maga
A more execrable man has never been POTUS.
sure there has been. though i despise trump. of course. get a history book. lincoln and fdr and andrew jackson and wilson and W the dumber(9.11.01 inside job), did much worse damage to humanity.
Did they rape children though? That’s Trumpstein’s secret sauce.
trump is a pederast and rapist. JFK for sure raped underage girls in the whitehouse, and i am sure the presidents in the 1800s raped plenty of little girls in their lives. men could do that no problem back then. and powerful men today. amerikan people are assholes. we keep voting for warmongering assholes who bomb the world. so there is that. too.
What do Epstein, Maxwell, Black and Wexner think about that?
US and Europe’s Rich and Famous and Ruling Class are blackmailed by Epstein Paedophile ring.
For whom?
Who benefitted from this?
Clue: Poland is investigating Russian involvement last month.
I can’t wait to hear Putin organised this paedophile ring.
I’m still awaiting.
Putin kidnapped the Lindbergh baby.
ha ha ha. my mother used to always point out the building that they hid out for the kidnapping………….
Israel. We’re preparing to bomb their mortal enemy as we speak.
Again.
Israel also has the Epstein files.
give Trump time
None of us lived through those first 3. But W definitely set us back badly during his 8 years thanks to 9/11.
my parents, lived through wilson and FDR. the bloody trail of ww1 and ww2 was quite deep and wide, too.
I miss that country that ceased to exist in the aftermath of 9/11.
Well said bmcc.
thanks
A more OPENLY execrable man has never been POTUS.