Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Trump's global tariffs struck down by US Supreme Court

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

611–620 of 1001 posts

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

#611

Post by [deleted] »

Animats wrote: post #579
bgentry wrote: post #77

The actual decision: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/24-1287_4gcj.pdf

Right. Most of the news articles don't link to the decision, which is worth reading. It's a 6-3 decision. Not close. Here's the actual decision: The judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in case No. 25–250 is affirmed. The judgment of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia in case No. 24–1287 is vacated, and the case is remanded with instructions to dismiss for…

[deleted]

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

#612

Post by RetpolineDrama »

tyre wrote: post #556
RetpolineDrama wrote: post #546

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

It’s not an absurd scenario. The law was written specifically to allow blocking imports from a country. The nuance is that nothing Congress passed granted to right to tax . Additionally, they did grant the power to partially block imports. Nothing says you have to enact “no imports from Japan” vs. “no imports of networking equipment from Lichtenstein.”

>The law was written specifically to allow blocking imports from a country.

The precise wording is regulate. The idea that "regulate" means you can turn it on or off with no in-between is beyond parody. Absurd. Hilarious. Farcical.

That said the headline is misleading and should be renamed, nothing is changing from this ruling.

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

#613

Post by bubblewand »

coldcode wrote: post #131
sreekanth850 wrote: post #92

what happens to those billions of dollars already collected?

The importers would get the refunds, and any of their customers they charged more for would simply keep the refund. If you paid it directly (like international product order) you probably won't ever get repaid, as they probably deleted the transaction or otherwise failed to record it. Refunds even for importers might be caught up in lawsuits which might never resolve. It's a mess, and SCOTUS did not address the mess.

Trump addressed the press a little while ago on this topic and claims he's not issuing any refunds until courts force him to. He chastised the Supreme Court for not telling him what to do about refunds, and essentially pleaded helplessness to do anything about it until he fights more lawsuits and rulings demanding specific action are issued, musing something to the effect of "I guess that will take another couple years".

He further claimed that this ruling puts his tariffs on a more certain basis(?!) because now he'll use different statutes that have been solidly litigated already (... so why weren't you opting to use those in the first place, if it's truly better? You didn't need to wait on this ruling to do that!) and that the only effect this ruling will have is a brief drop to ~10% across-the-board tariffs while they do the paperwork to bump them back up again under these other statutes. He repeatedly characterized this is good news for his tariffs, while also complaining extensively about the court and insulting the justices in the majority.

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

#614

Post by Maarten88 »

exceptione wrote: post #474
BizarroLand wrote: post #396

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There will be a wild party across the globe when that man passes. Flags burning, fireworks, nude parades, more alcohol consumed than the day prohibition was lifted. Red Hats will be crying in the street while sane and normal happy people dance like it's the rapture and kiss like they're falling in love for the first time all over again.

I wish everyone a nice party, but the problem isn't Trump. Its what behind him: the ideologues, the power brokers and their networks, the 0.001%. Plus the masses having been bathing in culture wars for years. Trump is just good for circus, I would say the GOP can call themselves really lucky with him. His job is to successfully capture media attention, keeping what enables him out of the spotlight. He lacks all quali…

> people who believe that crashing the US, including the dollar, enables them to build a US like they want

Yes, it's strange how dumb some rich/succesful people are. As I understand it, no civilization ever has done such a thing. If a civilization and its institutions crash, it remains failed/dysfunctional for a very long time. The only way to improve society is in small steps.

I hope the people who finance this all will wake up to the reality that it may well cost them everything, too.

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

#615

Post by fwip »

onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #339
apexalpha wrote: post #136

It's odd to me that something as fundamental as 'can the President unilaterally impose tariffs on any country he wants anytime he wants' is apparently so ill defined in law that 9 justices can't agree on it.

Statutory Law is 50,000 pages, and that's just the beginning of everything you need to consider. Make stupid laws, win stupid prizes. It's almost like the legal system is designed so that you can get away with murder if you can afford enough lawyers.

Of which, only a small fraction will be relevant in any particular case.

It's kind of like pointing at any major codebase and arguing that it's "stupid" to have millions of lines of code.

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

#616

Post by pear01 »

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…

He is also surely happy the Trump administration no longer sees fit to investigate or pursue anyone with connections to Epstein. Previously Lutnick had lied about the extent of their relationship, yet even after the recent relevations he can simply wave them off.

What a profitable time for the Lutnicks, who are of course already fabulously wealthy. Our system really does reward the best people.

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

#617

Post by metalliqaz »

bradleyjg wrote: post #340
mastax wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems likely to me the ruling took this long because John Roberts wanted to get a more unanimous ruling. Additionally, the law in this case isn’t ill defined whatsoever. Alito, Thomas, and to a lesser extent Kavanaugh are just partisan hacks. For many years I wanted to believe they had a consistent and defensible legal viewpoint, even if I thought it was misguided. However the past six years have destroyed that no…

Kavanaugh clearly isn’t in the same bucket. His votes go either way. I don’t recall seeing a single decision this administration where either Alito or Thomas wrote against a White House position. Not just in case opinions but even in an order. I don’t think we’ve seen a justice act as a stalking horse for the president in this way since Fortas.

His reputation will be forever tarnished by "Kavanaugh stops"

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

#618

Post by mullingitover »

dmix wrote: post #455
linuxhansl wrote: post #301

Finally some sanity. The administration has use laws about "national security" and other so call "emergencies" to impose tariffs. If everything is an emergency then nothing is, and that was clearly not congress' intention with those laws. The power to impose tariffs rests with the legislator, not the executive. Of course our congress is effectively useless - we can thank decades of Mitch McConnell's (and others) "not…

The most dangerous part of the current admin is the fealty he demands from congress and how exploits his popularity to be a kingmaker in local elections. This is something FDR did heavily in the 1930s to expand his own power and bully congress into passing the New Deal. https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/history/purge-1938 He also used legally questionable executive orders like crazy.

Honestly FDR doesn't get enough credit for probably saving capitalism.

He borrowed just enough of the stuff socialists were promising, and bolted it onto the government to mollify the working class who'd been absolutely ravaged by oligarchs for the preceding decades. You only have to look at the rest of the world to see how things might've turned out without FDR's very reasonable interventions.

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

#619

Post by dyauspitr »

hinkley wrote: post #439
mastax wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems likely to me the ruling took this long because John Roberts wanted to get a more unanimous ruling. Additionally, the law in this case isn’t ill defined whatsoever. Alito, Thomas, and to a lesser extent Kavanaugh are just partisan hacks. For many years I wanted to believe they had a consistent and defensible legal viewpoint, even if I thought it was misguided. However the past six years have destroyed that no…

Thomas isn’t a hack, he’s a shill. And he’s not even trying to be subtle about it. He’s somebody’s bitch and he literally drives around in the toys they bought for him as compensation. If any justice deserves to be impeached it’s him. I can’t believe they approved him in the first place. Anita Hill sends her regards.

But the toys are so cheap. It can’t possibly be just a matter of the money, there has to be some blackmail involved. Either that or he was always self hating.

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

#620

Post by allywilson »

apexalpha wrote: post #136

It's odd to me that something as fundamental as 'can the President unilaterally impose tariffs on any country he wants anytime he wants' is apparently so ill defined in law that 9 justices can't agree on it.

But that's not the issue.

'can the President unilaterally impose tariffs on any country he wants anytime he wants'

No, he can't impost tariffs on any country. He can only impose tariffs on American companies willing to import from any country.

Post reply on HN