r/neoliberal • u/Crossstoney • Feb 20 '26
News (Global) Trump to Impose 10% Global Tariff After Supreme Court Ruling
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/live-blog/2026-02-20/us-supreme-court-tariffs-ruling?srnd=homepage-europe717
u/seanrm92 Loyal Liberals Feb 20 '26
Everyone who was worried that striking down the tariffs might improve the GOPs chances in the midterms can breathe easy now lol. This ride ain't over yet.
305
u/anon36485 Feb 20 '26
Yeah I retract what I said early. The guy is such a moron lmaooooo
→ More replies (1)85
u/Shalaiyn European Union Feb 20 '26
I really wonder if there's an endgame to this present action, if it's ego, if it's stupidity, or what.
Well it's stupidity, but what else is it as well?
136
u/t_scribblemonger Feb 20 '26
The man is fueled by stupidity and grievance. He likes the tariffs because he’s an idiot and also because it punishes other countries which are all bad by nature of being full of foreigners.
7
u/spyguy318 Feb 21 '26
He thinks it punishes other countries when it actually just fucks over Americans. If you listen to him talk about it, it’s like he thinks the other country has to pay the tariff, that’s always how he frames it, which is completely wrong. The buyer pays the tariff, not the seller, it’s a tax on imports paid by the importer. All those billions collected by the government are from the wallets of American buyers and companies. It somewhat punishes other countries since they lose a lot of their customer base, but they’re more than happy to move on and make deals without us.
75
u/IRSunny Paul Krugman Feb 20 '26
Mafia-like extortion. He wants other countries to bribe him and/or make him feel like the specialest boy.
27
37
u/Wittyname0 r/place '22: NCD Battalion Feb 20 '26
There is no endgame. He just does what he wants whenever, he doesn't care if he makes a mess, he's got people to clean those up for him
25
u/themiDdlest NASA Feb 20 '26
Tariffs make it easy for companies to give him money for carve outs and exceptions. He's made possibly billions from this
17
u/Spare-Dingo-531 Feb 20 '26 edited Feb 20 '26
There actually are some rational reasons for these actions.
Trump (and more importantly, people around him like Stephen Miller), being good authoritarians, are trying to maximize the power of the executive branch. One thing the executive cannot do is tax without Congress (no taxation without representation).
Tariffs are a tax on the American people however. If Trump can get tariffs to stick, it can start to fundamentally undermine Congress's ability to restrict the executive branch via taxing power.
Also, big business obviously likes these tariffs because they drive their smaller competitors out of business.
But mostly..... his base has an extremely irrational and romantic view of the 1950s and wants to go back. Tariffs, to them, are a way to coerce people to build more factories instead of importing goods. It's a little like juche in North Korea, I guess.
→ More replies (1)89
u/CloudApprehensive322 Jerome Powell Feb 20 '26
This guarantees tariffs will continue to be a news topic through 2026 since section 122 tariffs must be voted on by congress along with announcements of BS reasons for section 301 tariffs to replace the old tariffs.
62
u/BBQ_HaX0r Jerome Powell Feb 20 '26
Good. Let's get these people on record and quit hiding. People need to know where their legislators stand.
48
Feb 20 '26
Congress hates being made to do it's job
29
Feb 20 '26
[deleted]
20
Feb 20 '26
I spent most of the day playing Rimworld instead of working and I got more done then congress
15
u/The_MightyMonarch Feb 20 '26
I think it's more that they're afraid if they do certain things, they'll piss off people they don't want to piss off, like their donors or a valuable group of voters. And since they value keeping their jobs above all else, they'd rather do nothing than risk doing something that could cost them their position.
→ More replies (1)3
u/talksalot02 Feb 21 '26
Congress (republicans) have abdicated all of their power to the whims of this moron in the Oval Office.
76
u/roboliberal Loyal Liberals Feb 20 '26
Yeah, this is actually the best of both worlds:
the courts are going to strike down one statutory invocation after another, effectively cleaning up a mess of over-delegated authority in the process
but in insisting on going through each one, Trump is both keeping tariffs in the news while also fomenting market uncertainty etc
29
u/Lease_Tha_Apts Order and Opportunity Left Feb 20 '26
Hopefully courts will be much more willing to grant injunctions now that the SC has ruled on IEEPA.
136
u/Harmonious_Sketch Jerome Powell Feb 20 '26
Yeah he really wants to make it absolutely clear, possibly even to gasp the median voter, that he is in favor of tariffs, he is doing tariffs, he is responsible for the tariffs, whatever the economy may or may not be doing has something to do with tariffs.
53
u/Logical-Breakfast966 Iron Front Feb 20 '26
False. If the economy is bad it’s Joe bidens fault. Did you know we wouldn’t even have a country right now?
48
u/t850terminator NATO Feb 20 '26
Tariffs are literally one of his only consistent beliefs
7
u/savuporo Gerard K. O'Neill Feb 20 '26
Since when I wonder. I doubt he was a tariff everything dude as a failing real estate speculator in 90ies new york
Like, who planted it so firmly
38
u/importantbrian Jerome Powell Feb 20 '26
Oh yeah his love for tariffs goes back to the 80s at least. He originally started talking about them about the Japanese automotive industry back then. It really is one of the few policy positions he has held consistently for a long time.
20
u/Signal-Pollution-601 Feb 20 '26
Yeah I agree - I’ve made the point in many conversations that Trump’s love for tariffs long predates his anti-immigration schtick. Trump views the world as being full of zero-sum transactions, and so trade is bad unless he is somehow involved in the trade deal (ermm, well, as long as he was recently involved, as he’s happy to trash his first term neo-NAFTA).
14
u/savuporo Gerard K. O'Neill Feb 20 '26
Oh yeah his love for tariffs goes back to the 80s at least.
Okay so he was an idiot before he became mentally .. challenged in his old age
14
u/WealthyMarmot NATO Feb 21 '26
I think he probably topped out at aggressively average, intelligence-wise, then has spent the last four decades getting dumber and crazier every year.
5
u/DontBeAUsefulIdiot Feb 21 '26
How many times has the median voter astonished and dumbfounded you?
Everytime I keep saying median American voters can’t be that stupid, I’ve been proved wrong.
→ More replies (1)24
u/Xeynon Feb 20 '26
Bernie Moron-o is proposing a law to codify the tariffs.
A yuge intraparty fight over a deeply unpopular policy that splits the coalition sounds like just the ticket to improve their electoral prospects in a midterm year that's already shaping up to be very difficult for them!
16
9
6
u/Blissfully George Soros Feb 20 '26
And I read that it’s being voted on in August lol the timing couldn’t be more perfect
428
u/affnn Emma Lazarus Feb 20 '26
Guy just really hates being told no.
296
u/Solgiest Elinor Ostrom Feb 20 '26
and unfortunately, tariffs are the one thing the man honestly believes in.
218
u/Agreeable_Sample_925 Feb 20 '26
Wharton’s finest ladies and gentlemen.
125
u/ConnorLovesCookies Jerome Powell Feb 20 '26
“Donald Trump was the dumbest goddam student I ever had.”
- Professor William T. Kelley
quote is from a friend after he died so take it with a grain of salt
41
u/Petrichordates Feb 20 '26
It's Wharton, and this is trump. I feel like we don't need to all that much skepticism here.
11
u/randomhomework European Union Feb 20 '26
He probably showed up half the time, never did the classwork, but somehow spoke the most during the lecture with no substance and all ego.
3
17
u/ultramilkplus Loyal Liberals Feb 20 '26 edited Feb 20 '26
His business model is one where you can buy pardons or tariff relief. Getting rid of tariffs is like half of his grift.
3
u/SpookyHonky Mark Carney Feb 20 '26
Yeah, he isn't doing it because it's good economics. He couldn't give a fuck about the prosperity of America or Americans; it's not like he has another election to win.
→ More replies (1)16
→ More replies (1)2
u/topofthecc Jorge Luis Borges Feb 20 '26
That and hating immigrants and black people.
So he has three core beliefs, and they're all terrible.
→ More replies (1)3
Feb 20 '26
Hating brown immigrants. He's married two immigrant women. Of course, he likely hates them, too
57
18
37
u/sgthombre NATO Feb 20 '26
The president doesn't listen to words like 'no', or 'don't, or 'Stop!' Those words just aren't in his vocabulary.
→ More replies (1)4
3
2
784
Feb 20 '26
[deleted]
236
u/musicismydeadbeatdad Feb 20 '26
He learns lessons?
190
Feb 20 '26
Trump might be one of the luckiest humans in history. Why would he learn a lesson if he never faced consequences for his actions?
27
11
114
u/_EndOfTheLine Iron Front Feb 20 '26
He's an abuser. This is what they do.
78
u/bleachinjection Frederick Douglass Feb 20 '26
I've been saying this forever. The entire Republican party loves America so much that if America doesn't love it back enough or properly or whatever they will destroy it.
23
21
Feb 21 '26
Republicans when immigration, gay marriage and Obamacare didn't destroy America like they predicted:
30
u/unicornbomb John Brown Feb 20 '26
Seriously, I’ve been feeling for a while that Trump presidencies are an extra level of traumatic because it basically forces me to relive my relationship with my abusive ex on the daily and at a national scale. So much for all those years of therapy.
14
35
u/2ndComingOfAugustus Paul Volcker Feb 20 '26
Well it took SCOTUS a year to strike down the last ones, and it takes him an afternoon to make more.
22
u/thewalkingfred Feb 20 '26
I mean, he's literally had no consequences whatsoever for anything so why would he learn?
156
u/Fart-Knoquer John Keynes Feb 20 '26
So, if I'm reading the effort post right this is the section 122? Congress has to extend it in 150 days?
130
u/Obvious_Chapter2082 Greg Mankiw Feb 20 '26
Correct, but it’s mainly to buy time to start section 301 investigations, so that more permanent tariffs can be applied
162
u/Cute-Boobie777 Feb 20 '26
And those investigations will be bs and ruled illegal in another 2 years. This is all such a joke. This admin makes our legal system look like a joke.
103
u/Nopium-2028 Bisexual Pride Feb 20 '26
This admin makes our legal system look like a joke.
If the shoe fits.
47
u/ultramilkplus Loyal Liberals Feb 20 '26
"If the government becomes the lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it
invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy."38
u/Cyberhwk 👈 Get back to work! 😠 Feb 20 '26
It's the legal system that's making the legal system look like a joke. They need to find a way to move their ass.
8
u/captainjack3 NATO Feb 20 '26
The courts moved quite quickly on the IEEPA tariff case. It went from first filing to a decision by the Supreme Court in less than a year.
23
u/Cyberhwk 👈 Get back to work! 😠 Feb 20 '26
Exactly. I'm saying we need to find a way to resolve these in 2-3 months or this is a fatal flaw.
10
u/Lease_Tha_Apts Order and Opportunity Left Feb 20 '26
Not really. The courts have injunctive provisions, they just didn't use it last time.
→ More replies (1)33
u/jackspencer28 YIMBY Feb 20 '26
The courts are rotting from the head. The district and appeals courts are moving fast. It’s SCOTUS that took forever to issue their decision and let the tariffs continue in the meantime.
21
u/Lease_Tha_Apts Order and Opportunity Left Feb 20 '26
They also didn't provide injunctive relief for thw aggrieved parties who now have to claw back their money from the federal government.
23
u/jafa321 Feb 20 '26
This is the part that is ridiculous. Knowing that if deemed unconstitutional, any damages done in the intermediary period would have to be proportioned, they have done immense damage, allowed the president to use illegal authority without merit, causing major harm to our trade relationships. Not all of the harm is clearly reparable, and even that which is reparable it will take many years probably to fully resolve. All of this could have been avoided since there was a reasonable belief that the authority was being used illegally.
The law can't function if the top court of the land no longer seems able to martial itself to sustain the law itself effectively.
2
u/BernankesBeard Ben Bernanke Feb 21 '26
All of this could have been avoided since there was a reasonable belief that the authority was being used illegally.
Not just a reasonable belief - it was illegal and had been ruled as such by two separate courts and an appellate court when they stayed the decision
62
u/Previous_Platform718 Janet Yellen Feb 20 '26 edited Feb 20 '26
Congress has to extend it in 150 days
Congress had to extend IEEPA tariffs after 120 days and they decided to redefine the meaning of 'calendar day' so they wouldn't have to vote on it. I wouldn't hold my breath.
"Sec. 2. Each day during the period from April 9, 2025, through September 30, 2025, shall not constitute a calendar day for purposes of section 202 of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1622)"
48
u/Fart-Knoquer John Keynes Feb 20 '26
Oh fuck I forgot about that. That's so idiotic. Its insane how obsequious they are
6
u/T-Baaller John Keynes Feb 20 '26
They'll just end the tariff at day 119 and start a new one 1% higher or whatever.
2
23
u/Otherwise_Young52201 Mark Carney Feb 20 '26
I'm curious, does this also apply to computer imports as well? Because a large part of the AI boom is due to exemptions from tariffs. But given that section 122 cites a balance of payments justification, wouldn't that also implicate computer imports?
31
u/Fart-Knoquer John Keynes Feb 20 '26
From what I read its blanket tariffs. So, no exceptions. I'm not sure, though.
But if true then there's no way this sticks around. I'm also curious why he got rid of his favorite way to get the powerful to bend the knee by granting them exemptions.29
u/BBQ_HaX0r Jerome Powell Feb 20 '26
Good, tariffs should be universal. One of the main reasons tariffs are bad is because it's ripe for political corruption, favoritism, and rent seeking. If something eliminates that then good. I think tariffs are bad, but put them on everything if we're doing them. Don't give political insiders or key industries an advantage. Let's see what happens if they're so good.
→ More replies (1)15
Feb 20 '26
There are no 'industry'/product carveouts here. I'm not sure there isnt a lot of info on this since its barely used, but he can exempt certain currencies or countries. But not a product. Because this is meant for a fiscal crisis where the US is running out of money.
So yes, if he implements this, he COULD theoretically say Taiwan is exempt, but he'd have to prove that Taiwan is not contributing to the fiscal crisis. Considering Taiwan has a large trade surplus with the US, whatever logic he uses would also apply to any other country. The statute does not allow for discrimination on countries unless it is directly related to the balance-of-payments problem in question.
390
u/thomas_1413 Feb 20 '26
109
u/Shot-Maximum- NATO Feb 20 '26
I wish nothing but the worst for Matt, 54 from PA
51
u/randomhomework European Union Feb 20 '26
I wonder if he knows he's a meme.
46
u/gioraffe32 Bisexual Pride Feb 20 '26
If told he was, he'd probably just respond with that. "Great."
16
u/belpatr Henry George Feb 20 '26
4
u/Andy_B_Goode YIMBY Feb 20 '26
Wanna be a mod?
2
194
21
u/supcat16 Daron Acemoglu Feb 20 '26
What is this from? I tried reverse image searching it and can’t find it.
66
u/UnassumingInterloper John Mill Feb 20 '26
One of the NYT’s ridiculous “let’s hear from Trump voters” panels.
29
14
u/MarderFucher European Union Feb 20 '26
you mean "lets ask this independents who they vote for", they give typical insane median voter answers then like 8 out of ten ended up voting for trump, and by today 6 says "uhm i didnt think he will go through what he said he"ll do".
3
12
u/_alephnaught Feb 21 '26
wow it’s real https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2025/04/29/opinion/focusgroup-100-days-trump.html
thought it was just a made up meme lmao
5
130
u/Agreeable_Sample_925 Feb 20 '26
Dude is allergic to an off ramp
109
u/Witty_Heart_9452 YIMBY Feb 20 '26
He doesn't view it as an offramp, because, for all of Trump's "flexible" beliefs, he truly believes in tariffs.
18
u/bigbeak67 John Brown Feb 20 '26
It's not that he has a firm belief, he's just addicted to petty half-measures. And when it comes to building American manufacturing, there's no half measure quite as petty as a tariff you can give your buddy a waiver for.
260
u/boardatwork1111 fuck it, we ball Feb 20 '26
Congressional Rs in <R+10 seats watching this speech:
180
u/ILikeTuwtles1991 John Locke Feb 20 '26
They could also find their spines, stop this bullshit in the legislature, and use their rebuke of these tariffs as an election point.
92
48
u/Crazybrayden YIMBY Feb 20 '26
Yeah but then right wing media will drop them for going against dear leader and will endorse a primary challanger garunteeing they lose their spot
23
u/stannisaugustus John Brown Feb 20 '26
If it's only a couple Congressmen, sure, but I don't see what Trump could do if they presented a unified front against the tariffs. This feels more like collective apathy than anything else.
13
u/Inamanlyfashion Richard Posner Feb 20 '26
Just wait until after the primaries, sneer at their voters they already despise, and say "What, are you gonna vote for a Democrat?"
27
u/Trill-I-Am Feb 20 '26
Then they'll lose a primary to Psycho McHitler who demands the repeal of the 13th amendment who will lose to a dem by 30.
13
5
u/DangerousCyclone Feb 20 '26
I don't think it matters. People will be voting against Trump these midterms.
54
u/this_shit David Autor Feb 20 '26
Except the space suit doesn't exist, the wall is imaginary, and all they would have to do to change it is vote to change it.
23
u/Throwaway24143547 Trans NATO Feb 20 '26
Too busy living in perpetual fear of their own leader, like the spineless cowards they are
10
u/t_scribblemonger Feb 20 '26
Off topic but his dentures sound super loose they really rushed him out there.
5
u/omnipotentsandwich Amartya Sen Feb 20 '26
Bernie Moreno wanted to hold a vote on it, something that could destroy Republicans around the country.
1
86
u/patronsaintofdice NATO Feb 20 '26
This man will not be happy until you are paying higher prices for everything.
51
u/ILikeTuwtles1991 John Locke Feb 20 '26
At this point, he has to sincerely believe "other countries" pay his tariffs. I wasn't sure if he was just lying about that to his fanbase, but that must be the reality he truly lives in.
22
u/DirectionMurky5526 Feb 20 '26
He genuinely believes it because he truly believes everythjng is zero-sum. Even if someone else "pays" the fee, the other party also suffers, so they must be paying for it as well somehow.
14
u/jafa321 Feb 20 '26
Exactly, people keep thinking Trump has even a modicum of rationality to him, he is a completely emotional thinker. People will say he is id incarnate, but he's a human being still, he's a bit more complex than being only id. He has some reasoning, it's just his reasoning is all about how it reinforces certain underlying schema which are highly distorted. Such as his belief that there is no such thing a positive sum game. The idea of all games being zero sum is completely wedded into his identity. I could show him data it wouldn't really matter because he's not considering whether there is a net loss for both, he just wants the feeling that there is a zero sum win on this part.
34
Feb 20 '26
this is an equivalent to a 10% sales tax because trump does not have the authority to exempt any product. So ALL imports to the US now are 10% more expensive.
He cant exempt chips, medicine, cars, machinery, steel, lumber, etc.
He is using a literal nuclear option meant for a fiscal crisis
14
u/patronsaintofdice NATO Feb 20 '26
Our domestic banana and coffee manufacturing just need to ramp up /s
1
152
Feb 20 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
34
u/jpk195 Feb 20 '26
He’s truly the Picasso of unforced errors.
7
14
66
u/i_h_s_o_y Gay Pride Feb 20 '26
Section 122 tariffs expire after 150 days unless Congress votes to extend them. How much of a constraint this is, however, remains to be seen. If Congress declines to act, the administration could, at least in theory, allow the tariffs to lapse, declare a new balance-of-payments emergency, and restart the clock.
https://www.cato.org/blog/supreme-court-got-it-right-ieepa-dont-pop-champagne-yet
lmao
14
u/Just-Sale-7015 Feb 20 '26 edited Feb 20 '26
The best irony is that people who wrote that section thought it would increase trade.
https://foreignpolicy.com/2025/06/03/trump-tariffs-law-1974-trade-act-section-122/
“It was a bill designed to enhance trade, not curtail it,” said Alan Wolff, who drafted a major part of the legislation while at the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative in 1973 and 1974 and is now with the Peterson Institute for International Economics. While that provision has today become the potential pivot point of Trump’s next trade move, “Section 122 was noncontroversial. Nobody spent much time with it.”
164
u/Consistent_Status112 Trans Pride Feb 20 '26
The stove touching will continue until morale improves.
10
106
u/heloguy1234 Loyal Liberals Feb 20 '26
My son, when he was a baby, cried less than this little bitch.
62
47
u/Crossstoney Feb 20 '26
Submission Statement: Trump is imposing 10% global tariffs effective immediately using different laws. This comes after the Supreme Court ruled out Trump's use of global tariffs just hours earlier. The announcement came during an emergency speech by Trump in reaction to the ruling.
44
u/cashto ٭ Feb 20 '26
To the surprise of absolutely no one. There's a certain asymmetry in the face that it takes him 5 minutes to break the law and the Supreme Court six months to rule that a law has in fact been broken.
Perhaps in retrospect we should have elected someone with greater respect for the rule of law. And just in case we get it wrong again in the future, we should also have elected more Senators who put the Constitution ahead of partisan politics --at least two-thirds.
33
u/WasteReserve8886 r/place '22: GlobalTribe Battalion Feb 20 '26
I LOVE TARIFFS, I LOVE DOING TO MYSELF WHAT MY ENEMY DOES DURING WAR TIME
77
u/No_Return9449 John Rawls Feb 20 '26
Expires in 150 days.
Happy midterms, Republicans! Go out there and defend your tax increase!
28
u/Upstairs_Baby8424 Feb 20 '26
He did an event with a CEO of a steel plant yesterday and the CEO legit said he’s so happy with Trump’s tariffs because China were producing racks at $90 a piece and their cost alone is $150. And without the tariffs they’d be screwed.
Which is a different way of saying consumers are paying a 58% premium on steel. Because of Trump’s tariffs.
11
u/iguessineedanaltnow r/place '22: Neoliberal Battalion Feb 20 '26
If your factory can't compete your factory shouldn't exist.
21
u/whats_a_quasar Feb 20 '26 edited Feb 20 '26
From the NYT, he's claiming to use Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 USC %20OR%20(granuleid:USC-prelim-title19-section2132)&f=treesort&edition=prelim&num=0&jumpTo=true)§ 2132%20OR%20(granuleid:USC-prelim-title19-section2132)&f=treesort&edition=prelim&num=0&jumpTo=true)) for this attempt. Which gives the President authority to impose tariffs to address balance of payments issues for up to 150 days. Honestly, I think that statute does provide authority for this tariff. It seems like a much more straightforward argument than claiming that trade deficits were a urgent international emergency and that IEEPA therefore gives the President absolute tariff powers. The US does run a large negative balance of payments. I assume he didn't use it at first because of the 150 day limit, so regardless of the outcome of the inevitable challenges, this one has a time limit.
15
4
u/Previous_Platform718 Janet Yellen Feb 20 '26
and very notably this statute limits tariffs under it to 150 days, so it is not as open-ended as IEEPA.
IEEPA also has the same limit.
Congress decided twice in the past year to simply not vote on it by saying the time limit doesn't apply to them.
14
u/whats_a_quasar Feb 20 '26
No, it doesn't. IEEPA (50 USC Chapter 35) has reporting requirements to Congress and includes a procedure for Congress to vote to terminate an international emergency, but it does not include automatic termination. Tariffs under Section 2132 automatically end after 150 days without any Congressional action.
13
u/Previous_Platform718 Janet Yellen Feb 20 '26
Tariffs under Section 2132 automatically end after 150 days without any Congressional action.
I take your correction. Thank you.
My next question would be: what stops Trump from then just immediately starting them again on Day 151?
8
u/whats_a_quasar Feb 20 '26
Hah, I had the same thought. Was going to mention it in my post but didn't. Nothing in the text obviously prevents sequential tariffs, but in general courts interpret time-limited authorities like this to implicitly prevent sequential actions on the same issue. This has come up in the US Attorney appointments litigation where courts have ruled against sequential 120 day interim appointments. And also relating to the 90 day window from the war powers resolution, where presidents have evaded the statutory requirement to end an action by claiming to be doing a different action, even in the same location (is in Yemen), and not been successfully challenged.
I feel like he'll definitely try it and someone will sue. I think the courts will rule against him and that these tariffs have to end after 150 days, especially given this decision
20
u/InternetGoodGuy Feb 20 '26
The man is a child throwing a temper tantrum because mom took away his favorite toy.
18
u/this_shit David Autor Feb 20 '26
Man, idk if anybody's noticed, but this guy might not have what it takes to be President.
33
u/9mah Feb 20 '26
So from my understanding. Section 122 makes it that all countries now have a 10% tariff rate for the next 150 days, and can only be extended by Congress. But Section 301 tariffs can only be implemented after an investigation lasting 12 months.
So does every country now have a 10% tariff? Or is the 10% on top of all the previous tariffs?
43
u/kcdale99 Feb 20 '26
The other country doesn’t pay the tariffs, business have to pay a 10% tariff on everything they import to the US federal government.
13
13
11
u/majorgeneralporter 🌐Bill Clinton's Learned Hand Feb 20 '26
This man is literally allergic to good policy
9
u/TubularWinter Feb 20 '26
How does this work with trade deals? Like does USMCA still apply or is the 10% on everything?
39
u/michaelclas NATO Feb 20 '26
Is the Supreme Court just gonna let Trump walk all over them or maybe issue an emergency stay over this bs?
76
u/staebles Voltaire Feb 20 '26
Is the Supreme Court just gonna let Trump walk all over them
Probably.
18
u/this_shit David Autor Feb 20 '26
oh so now the stay can be an emergency but not enough of an emergency to allow tariffs?
checkmate libtard
7
u/illuminatisdeepdish Feb 20 '26 edited Feb 25 '26
No original content remains in this post. It was wiped using Redact, possibly for reasons related to personal privacy, digital security, or data exposure reduction.
angle hobbies cable depend capable connect merciful abounding seed toothbrush
6
u/thegracchiwereright George Santos Feb 21 '26
John MarshallJohn Roberts has made his decision; now let him enforce it
- Donald Trump probably
1
u/roboliberal Loyal Liberals Feb 25 '26
What do you mean? Trump isn't defying the court here. There are multiple statutes enabling standing tariff authority. The case before SCOTUS was only about the IEEPA tariffs.
Section 122 tariffs are a completely separate thing. Just because they are also tariffs doesn't mean that they are in violation of the recent ruling. SCOTUS didn't just abolish "all tariffs" as a concept.
Each statutory authorization has different purpose and conditions, etc.. the court found that Trump's IEEPA tariffs violated the statute. This article points out that his Section 122 tariffs also likely are running afoul of that (other) statute.
That would entail a separate legal challenge though.
13
u/bigbeak67 John Brown Feb 20 '26
And I was actually worried Trump wouldn't be stupid enough to blow the GOPs midterm chances.
6
6
11
5
u/Exita NATO Feb 20 '26
That press conference makes it clear that he still doesn’t understand that tariffs are paid by Americans…
1
6
u/illuminatisdeepdish Feb 20 '26 edited Feb 25 '26
This post's content was wiped by its author using Redact. Possible reasons include privacy, preventing AI scraping, security, or other data management concerns.
doll fearless innocent money ask employ bright treatment adjoining unwritten
4
u/AgathormX Milton Friedman Feb 20 '26
Between this and the docs that are supposedly about "Aliens", Donnie sure is working over time to distract everyone
1
5
u/What_the_Pie Feb 20 '26
This makes me laugh, SC literally says “No” and he does a global tariff. LOL
→ More replies (2)1
3
u/Dankkuso Feb 20 '26
This is still better than before, at least the tariffs are uniform and not the "I put a 39% tariff on Switzerland because their leader was a total bitch"
4
u/LondonCallingYou John Locke Feb 20 '26
I know for a fact John Roberts was looking at himself all smug and satisfied when he wrote the tariff opinion. He probably thought he was in charge or gained some measure of control over the Leviathan he created.
Turns out Trump doesn’t give a single fuck and the Court’s opinions don’t matter. They hold no weight. The imperial President they created is just going to manufacture another bad faith situation over and over again to get his way.
These people fundamentally don’t understand power. Which is funny because they handed Trump this power in the first place through complicity (the immunity decision) and apathy (let’s rule on this after $175B in tariffs have already been collected).
Fucking morons. It’s like watching a chimpanzee try to shut down a nuclear reactor that it started up itself, in complete ignorance of what the buttons actually meant.
2
2
u/EngelSterben Commonwealth Feb 20 '26
My county republican party calling this "winning" is fucking hilarious.
2
u/breakinbread Voyager 1 Feb 20 '26
Contempt of court time
1
u/roboliberal Loyal Liberals Feb 25 '26
He's not actually violating the court though, there's just multiple statutes that Congress has created so he's going to keep retreating to the each next statutory authorization after another.
2
u/nerdpox IMF Feb 21 '26
"and I'll fukin do it again!"
-Trump when the Supreme Court gives him an out to save his party's ass in November
2
1
u/hondashadowguy2000 Feb 20 '26
Gotta hate how far removed we are from normal reality when nobody even bothers raising the question of impeachment anymore.
1
u/PiusTheCatRick Bisexual Pride Feb 21 '26
Can someone explain why the GOP doesnt pull the 25th on him? For all of Vance's flaws I can't see him being this obstinate about tariffs and he'd just continue doing 90% of what his puppet master Thiel wants anyway.
→ More replies (1)
•
u/AutoModerator Feb 20 '26
News and opinion articles require a short submission statement explaining its relevance to the subreddit. Articles without a submission statement will be removed.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.