Trump's global tariffs struck down by US Supreme Court • Hacker News Board

Re: Trump's global tariffs struck down by US Supreme Court

#281

Post by unethical_ban » Fri, Feb 20, 2026, 4:50 PM UTC

jen729w wrote: post #134

maxwell wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What piece of paper is worth more to you?

The difference with many other countries -- I'm Australian -- is that we don't constantly bang on about how glorious our constitution is and how it's the be-all end-all. We just get on with it. And I wouldn't mind if the American constitution did provide all of these tremendous benefits that everyone bangs on about all the time. That'd be great! But it turns out nobody's really tested that, until now. And you get an…

The problem with the US Constitution and its religious status in the US is that it contains both fundamental rights and protections for citizens, AND the mundane details of implementing the government.

If you put 500 mock Constitutional conventions together at universities and cities across the country, I would polymarket my 401k that none of them would come up with the same structure we have today in the US. Many republics founded since 1791 have far better democratic structures than the US does. I call the US a semi-democracy because of our Senate, Electoral college, gerrymandered House districts and first-past-the-post voting.

Edit: I got "danged" so here is my response to the person below -

Consider the bill of rights and federal limits separately from the structure of government.

I believe France and Australia have better "democratic infrastructure" and I'm sure they aren't the only ones.

Re: Trump's global tariffs struck down by US Supreme Court

#282

Post by linhns » Fri, Feb 20, 2026, 4:50 PM UTC

pseingatl wrote: post #243

Because of thw tariffs, it has not been possible to send small packages from Asia to the US. I wonder now how long it will take for service to be restored.

I believe this is due to the USPS loophole being closed, tariffs only play a small part.

Re: Trump's global tariffs struck down by US Supreme Court

#283

Post by anjel » Fri, Feb 20, 2026, 4:50 PM UTC

coldpie wrote: post #153

taeric wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Holy crap, you couldn't make a story that is a more direct echo of the plot point in Wonderful Life if you tried.

If whoever runs in 2028 does not have a concrete plan for investigating & prosecuting every single person who worked under this admin from top to bottom, they are wasting everyone's time. We need to see hundreds of life-in-prison sentences by the end of 2029.

Nationalize the entire trump family fortune with RICO. Impoverishment is the perfect moral hazard to reign in hubristic and corrupt business practices.

Re: Trump's global tariffs struck down by US Supreme Court

#284

Post by esseph » Fri, Feb 20, 2026, 4:50 PM UTC

furyofantares wrote: post #152

xnx wrote: post #57

Am I understanding this right? 1) US customer pays huge import tax on imported goods in the form of higher prices. 2) Seller sends the collected tax to the US government 3) US government will refund all/most of that tax back to the seller after this ruling 4) Seller gets to keep the returned tax money as pure profit (no refund to customer)

Why do we repeatedly say that tarrifs are passed off in full to the consumer in the form of higher prices? Isn't that as obviously wrong as the argument for them, that they're paid entirely by the other countries? Is there a reason to believe, or evidence, that it's not a mixture of the two? edit: I want to highlight esseph's reply has a link to evidence that last year's tarrifs were passed off 90% to consumers, whic…

"American consumers bore 90% of last year's nearly six-fold tariff increase, adding $1,000-$2,400 to average household budgets, despite overall inflation dropping to 2.4% in January 2026."

https://www.forbes.com/sites/petercohan/2026/02/15/consumers...

Re: Trump's global tariffs struck down by US Supreme Court

#285

Post by mandevil » Fri, Feb 20, 2026, 4:50 PM UTC

wiradikusuma wrote: post #186

"The ruling applies to his so-called "Liberation Day" tariffs, but not individual tariffs he's imposed on specific countries or products " -- So what's gonna happen next? For countries that negotiated special treatment, they'll be stuck with a (now worse) deal? For other countries, they'll return to the previous deal (non-tariff)?

So I am far from an expert, but I saw that Capital Economics (a Macroeconomic analysis firm) put out a note saying that Trump still had power under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974. But there are three catches for that. First, it only lasts for 150 days unless Congress votes to approve them. Second, that it has to apply to all countries equally: meaning that it can't be used to give some countries a break if they sign a deal, so all of the deals are going to be unenforcable on America's end. Third, it caps the tariff rate at 15%.

Like with refunds, this is a mess of Trump's own making, and now we get to figure it out.

Re: Trump's global tariffs struck down by US Supreme Court

#286

Post by joezydeco » Fri, Feb 20, 2026, 4:51 PM UTC

Ajedi32 wrote: post #256

ssully wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except that isn’t relevant at all. This Supreme Court is completely cooked. If the case was “can Trump dissolve New York as a state” you would still have 3 justices siding in his favor with some dog shit reasoning.

Read the opinions. Both are pretty reasonable. I think the dissent has a good point that a plain language interpretation of the term "regulate imports" would seem to include tariffs. The bigger issue I think is that that statute exists in the first place. "Emergency powers" that a president can grant himself just by "declaring an emergency" on any pretense with no checks or balances is a stupid idea.

Kavanaugh's opinion seems to say "well, this would be too hard to undo, so we should just leave it alone and let Trump continue". That hardly seems 'reasonable'. Just lazy and/or partisan.

Re: Trump's global tariffs struck down by US Supreme Court

#287

Post by jghn » Fri, Feb 20, 2026, 4:51 PM UTC

coldpie wrote: post #153

taeric wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Holy crap, you couldn't make a story that is a more direct echo of the plot point in Wonderful Life if you tried.

If whoever runs in 2028 does not have a concrete plan for investigating & prosecuting every single person who worked under this admin from top to bottom, they are wasting everyone's time. We need to see hundreds of life-in-prison sentences by the end of 2029.

I can tell you what will happen instead.

If a dem wins in 2028, the big push will be one of reconciliation and acceptance. Let bygones be bygones. And it'll happen. And then for the next 4 years conservative media will absolutely pound that person's backside over made up and/or exaggerated corruption claims. Then in 2032 the GOP candidate will claim they're going to look into these claims.

Re: Trump's global tariffs struck down by US Supreme Court

#288

Post by fuzzfactor » Fri, Feb 20, 2026, 4:51 PM UTC

FrustratedMonky wrote: post #165

edot wrote: post #40

Howard Lutnick and his sons are surely happy about this. It’s almost like Howard Lutnick, the Secretary of Commerce , knew this would happen. His sons, at their firm Cantor Fitzgerald, have been offering a tariff refund product wherein they pay companies who are struggling with paying tariffs 20-30% of a potential refund, and if (as they did today) they get struck down, they pocket the 100% refund. https://www.financ…

Remember when a conflict of interest was so important that Jimmy Carter sold his peanut farm, because heaven forbid, he accidentally made some money while president. Like his peanut farm would unduly sway government peanut policy.

Remember when the late President Carter was being laid to rest?

There was a tremendous outpouring of grief and honor, and so much heartfelt condolences. From all over America and the whole world. Deep respect as fitting as can be for such a great human being, for the type of honest & compassionate leadership you could only get in the USA, and only from the cream that rises to the top.

Every single minute it invoked the feeling that Trump deserves nothing like this ever.

Re: Trump's global tariffs struck down by US Supreme Court

#289

Post by estimator7292 » Fri, Feb 20, 2026, 4:51 PM UTC

duxup wrote: post #61

I don’t get what SCOTUS is up to as far as a practical matter goes. They’re hands off so the president can clearly gather illegal taxes. Then they change their mind. So what? The government gives the taxes back? Is that even possible? Next step what? Trump does something else illegal and SCOTUS majority sits on their hands for a year or more? SCOTUS majority’s deference to their guy has become absurd… the judicial br…

The government gives back overpaid taxes every year, and there are long-established mechanisms to deduct qualifying purchases from your tax burden.

If we lived in a functional society, one might expect that tarriffs could be refunded through the normal income tax refund process hinged upon supplying recipts of tarriffs paid. I do not expect this to happen in the USA.

Re: Trump's global tariffs struck down by US Supreme Court

#290

Post by mrtesthah » Fri, Feb 20, 2026, 4:51 PM UTC

ReptileMan wrote: post #144

tayo42 wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fix some of the ambiguities that allowed power to be concentrated in the executive branch. Automatically start elected officials so things like avoiding swearing in don't happen. Limit the power of these executive orders. Introduce recall votes. Switch to public funding for all elections. Theres plenty we can do. That's off the top if my head. I'm sure if smart people sat down to think about it there are lots of prac…

Or hear me out - the congress should start doing their job. The main problem is the congress has been MIA for decades and outsources their power to the executive via regulatory bodies. And probably a good idea for SCOTUS to return some power to the states. There is too much power concentrated in washington, the congress refuses to yield it and the result is imperial presidency. Which is exalting when the president is…

>>Switch to public funding for all elections.

>Or hear me out - the congress should start doing their job.

Well, we make them do their job by holding them accountable to the people rather than a billionaire donor class. Citizens United is at the root of all this.