UPDATE:
? BREAKING: In a HUGE move, President Trump is raising tariffs to 15% WORLDWIDE in response to the Supreme Court
— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) February 21, 2026
47 is DOUBLING DOWN. ?
"Based on a thorough, detailed, and complete review of the ridiculous, poorly written, and extraordinarily anti-American decision on Tariffs… pic.twitter.com/TdI1CgDzVO
Trump woke up angry.
?BREAKING: US Supreme Court SHOOTS DOWN President Trump's sweeping tariffs in a 6-3 ruling
— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) February 20, 2026
This is a devastating loss.
Kavanaugh wrote a 63 PAGE DISSENT
Roberts, Gorsuch, and Barrett joined the liberals
BILLIONS of dollars will now be missed out on. pic.twitter.com/Y3cF7H6BNI
??This ruling is stunningly blunt and unequivocal: “In light of the breadth, history, and constitutional context of that asserted authority, he must identify clear congressional authorization to exercise it.” Biggest, most sweeping rebuke of his presidency – and of his…
— Jim VandeHei (@JimVandeHei) February 20, 2026
JUST IN – U.S. Supreme Court has stated that refunding billions from Trump's illegal tariff collections "is likely to be a 'mess,'" but "may be required." pic.twitter.com/SpvqOSh5Yg
— Disclose.tv (@disclosetv) February 20, 2026
Tariffs have been political malpractice for Trump.
— (((Harry Enten))) (@ForecasterEnten) February 20, 2026
They were an inflection point: all CBS polls post-Liberation Day have had him at a negative net approval vs. none beforehand.
All of it for nothing. Rarely have I seen people turn against a policy as fast as they did tariffs. pic.twitter.com/mo9Tyq4k8Z
Georgia man praises Trump’s handling of the economy:
— johnny maga (@johnnymaga) February 20, 2026
“He has a grasp on the economy and knows how to fix it after four years of destruction.”
“So tariffs are working?”
“It’s a no brainer for me.” ? pic.twitter.com/XNtQ71IeNQ
? Howard Lutnick's family firm bought up the rights to tariff refunds for 20-30 cents on the dollar after Liberation Day last year.
— Meet Kevin (@realMeetKevin) February 20, 2026
Today, the Supreme Court struck the tariffs down. For every $100 invested, Lutnick's sons just made 3-5x.
Welcome to Crony Corrupt America. pic.twitter.com/Wr1FkA5kZk
Fake News. Completely false. https://t.co/sUXnhfbMKc pic.twitter.com/XuzW0g7415
— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) February 20, 2026
Today’s 6-3 ruling by the Supreme Court is a Victory for the American People and a Win for the Separation of Powers enshrined in the Constitution of the United States.
— Mike Pence (@Mike_Pence) February 20, 2026
In Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump, our Supreme Court has reaffirmed that the Constitution grants Congress -…
— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) February 21, 2026
As I expected, Donald Trump took a big L on tariffs at the Supreme Court. Trump has used unilaterally wielded tariffs as clubs to punish and reward foreign countries. This isn’t how tariffs have historically been used and the chaos that Trump has created based on whims and mood swings has made tariffs unpopular. He has succeeded though in rolling back presidential power to use tariffs.
“The Supreme Court struck down a suite of President Trump’s tariffs on Friday, a historic blow to the administration’s economic agenda.
The big picture: In a rare rebuke of Trump’s power, the nation’s highest court said many of the administration’s tariffs were illegal. The 6-3 ruling sets a new boundary for what policies presidents can impose without congressional approval.
What they’re saying: “[T]he Government reads IEEPA to give the President power to unilaterally impose unbounded tariffs and change them at will. That view would represent a transformative expansion of the President’s authority over tariff policy,” the ruling says, referring to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. …”
The White House is disputing the Wired story which went viral yesterday that Howard Lutnick’s sons at Cantor Fitzgerald are set to make a fortune by betting against tariffs.
“The Supreme Court decision striking down Donald Trump’s many tariffs may prove to be a windfall for the family of Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, a key architect of Trump’s signature economic policy.
In July, Wired reported that Cantor Fitzgerald, which Lutnick chaired until he was appointed to Trump’s Cabinet, was allowing its traders to purchase the rights to hundreds of millions of dollars of refunds in the event the tariffs were struck down in court. The firm now happens to be headed by Lutnick’s sons Kyle and Brandon. …”
Trump responded to the Supreme Court ruling by unveiling zombie tariffs which have a different legal basis. The whole matter will continue to be litigated in court for the rest of Trump’s term.
“President Trump moved swiftly on Friday to resurrect his punishing tariffs and circumvent a stunning loss at the Supreme Court, ordering a new 10 percent tax on all imports along with other trade actions in a bid to preserve his primary source of economic leverage around the world.
Striking a defiant tone in the face of a legal defeat, Mr. Trump asserted at a news conference that he remained unbowed in a global trade war that has come to define his second term in office. The president even signaled that the tariffs he is now pursuing may yet prove more painful and lasting than those they are meant to replace. …”
Wired reported that Cantor Fitzgerald, which Lutnick chaired until he was appointed to Trump’s Cabinet, was allowing its traders to purchase the rights to hundreds of millions of dollars of refunds in the event the tariffs were struck down in court. The firm now happens to be headed by Lutnick’s sons Kyle and Brandon. …”
Behind closed doors, the GOP which never supported tariffs in the first place is privately celebrating the Supreme Court decision. Trump is setting back the cause of economic nationalism.
“The small bloc of Republicans who have publicly broken with President Trump on trade policy aren’t the only ones thrilled about the Supreme Court overturning his global tariffs, Axios has learned.
Why it matters: Cracks in GOP support for protecting Trump’s trade barriers had already grown significant by the time of the ruling, and Republicans tell Axios a “messy” full-scale revolt on the issue was just around the corner. …”
When Trump leaves office in 2029, Republicans like Ted Cruz will campaign and try to win the nomination on returning to the old globalist free trade status quo ante.
Roberts, Gorsuch, and Barrett did not join the liberals, they are the liberals.
Trump (or his crooked advisors) picked the wrong statute on which to justify them. The other statutes (which should have been used) require more evidence of unfair practices on the part of the nations whose items are subjected to tariffs. There is no shortage of such evidence. However, doing it this way enabled Trump’s NYC pal Howard Lutnick to profit even more handsomely than he did during the 9/11 scam involving his old gig at Cantor-Fitzgerald.
Only way to avoid returning the old globalist order is burn the whole Jew house down so the return becomes impossible.
“When Trump leaves office in 2029, Republicans like Ted Cruz will campaign and try to win the nomination on returning to the old globalist free trade status quo ante.”
Interesting comment. I am at the point of my thinking that these things are scripted, WWF style, so they will install the Democrat in 2028, if there is an “election”, so they will need a suitable GOP heel, someone sort of plausible as President, but incapable of winning the election, even by accident.
And I had Ted Cruz as a really likely choice. He was the runner up for the nomination in 2016, so he would be a plausible nominee. But he is supposed to be really unlikeable, so would lose in the general election. But as a bonus, he was born in Canada, and though his mother was an American citizen, he is unlikely to be constitutionally eligible. If he won by accident, that could be used to invalidate the election. They may go with someone completely unknown, or someone like Howard Luttnick who is even more unlikeable, but the inability of Cruz to even win by accident would have to be a plus for them.
By the way, I skimmed through the opinions, and read the glosses Martin Armstrong put up on the Armstrong Economics site, and Karl Denninger on the Market Ticker site. Here are my impressions.
There are several laws, going back to the 1930s, that allow presidents to cut off trade with countries, including blocking exports from the United States to those countries, on several grounds. These range from being the enemy of the USA generally, to fraudulent trade practices such as “dumping”. It seems that this involves trade embargoes, not tariffs, though Armstrong and Denninger disagree on this point.
The Supreme Court decision was just that the Trump administration used the wrong law (this could have been deliberate sabotage), and maybe that they could do embargoes and not tariffs. It pointed out that Congress missed several opportunities just this year and last year to fix things on their end.
You probably have to write about this, but it seems like more Kabuki or WWF stuff.
Brad, the Trump economic plan just got destroyed. Because Trump was counting on the tariffs covering the fact that federal government spending has increased at the same rate or at a slightly higher rate than in past history. There has been NO decrease in spending under Trump!
When the above sinks in, people will run for the exits!
Trump is correct on tarrifs. In the past, originally, tarrifs were used to fund the federal government, and later were used by Yankees to disadvantage the South. But Trump is not using them to punish the South, he is using them to make trade more advantageous to the US. Little wonder that the useless Supreme Court ruled against Trump, they are protecting the status quo. Read the dissent to see why they ruled wrong.
The three branches of government are co-equal. Let the Supreme Court rule as they will, they cannot enforce any thing. Enforcement is the responsibility of the Executive Branch, so it is wonderful for Trump to push back on this. Trumps advisers bet very early in the administration that the Supreme Court would not pick a hill to die on, but it looks like it did.
Well that’s swell — we can continue to suppport much of the worlds economy as we’ve done for the past 30 years.
Trump can, of course, kidnap a foreign country’s leader and steal its resources, blockade another country to force regime change and threaten war against Iran at the very real risk of starting WWIII. Oh yes, he has the authority to do that.
Avoid those costly imports!
Save big!
Invention of the year (so far)!
New Practical-AI Mower Guidance System Attachment
https://gab.com/RealMrAmericanPatriot/posts/116110552669986011
Partisang Dem activists JUdges obtsructing ICE agents, Judges declaring null full jury convictions, judges in the 5th circuit blocking DOJ/FBI in the Distsricts far beyond their geographical jurisdiction. . The judiciary has been expanding its reach and power beyond the ORIGINAList(Scalia) Constitutional text. In the sepcific topic of TARIFFS has been considered under the branch of the EXECUTIVE branch since 1776 and the seminal Report on Manufacturing. SCOTUS can NOT issue a FLAT all inclusive decision for all America’s tarding relations. China is not Haity or viceversa, can SCOTUS make TARIFFS policies for both,not really Haity main exports are textiles, China is the #2 industrial superpower in direct geopolitical, economic competition where tariffs play a major central role. Back in nthe 1700s the Founding fathers mainly Alexander Hamilton undersyood that the European powers UK/France were using Tariffs to keep the USA as agrarian nation a source of primary raw resources. The European failed to kill the incipient industrial American economy, and American exports began booming internationally. The British globalists under the guise of Free traders kept sabotaging the young nation which was the main reason for the War of 1812, the issue reached its peak struggle when Abraham Licoln defeated the English Bankers financing the Cotton slave AGRARIAN South. Tariffs are teh heart of the industrial base of any nation which can only be negotiatied according to the geo/economic dynamics of both nations, no SCOTUS/Judges decision can achieve that. SCOTUS has closed the tariffs option to narrow interpretations. I strongly believe that teh BEST Trump option is TAXATION, IF an American CorporationA wish to move to China they can NOT claim USA Tax credits, deductions,subsidies, even repartions for losses, expenses,refunds for excessive taxation in China/Mexico/Europe etc.In fact the American taxpayers had been subsidizing American corporations moving over seas, outsourcing to Mexico/China,excessive taxation abroad,,LOSSES costs in their foreign operations.In other words GM, Apple, Carterpillar pay more taxes in China while claiming deductions in their USA taxes. The SCOTUS decision will effectively wipe out most small entreprenuers, patents holders, copyrights holders, medium industrial manufacturing exporters tha faced up to 30% ChineseTariffs.Big coprorations stand to claim TRILLIONS in USA TAX refunds, damages, reparations real or perceived costs.
has hunter admitted 2 being a dem yet?
I haven’t told anyone to support Democrats.