they will strike them down

the Trump Administration will move to different types of tariffs under section 302

no idea what the ultimate effect will be but short term the market will tank with the uncertainty.

Trump has been placing tariffs on a whim. I don't know how you can uphold that.

I could see them maybe saying fentanyl is an "emergency," but trade imbalance is not and "Canada made a video I didn't like" is certainly not.

Its hard to see that 5 judges won't see this as unconstitutional. 3 would go against Trump in any scenario, and you only have find 2 more.

Personally I think the reciprocal tariffs should be struck down, and I voted for Trump. A trade imbalance isn't an emergency, and the emergency has changed many times since April, with most changes depending on Trump's mood that day.

IEEPA is also iffy, especially for Canada. I could see an argument for China and Mexico.

Yeah, I think the tariffs get struck down. And, Trump is out here recommending $2,000 payments to Americans as counterbalance.

I think he sees the writing on the wall and is now throwing something (anything) at it to see what sticks.

The betting odds favor the court ruling against Trump, but listening to some of the legal commentators, the big question is will there be a cohesive decision on constitutional grounds or will the court give a split/confusing ruling with some justices saying he has the power to tariff under IEEPA, but the existing tariffs are too broad and allow lower courts to interpret exactly which of the tariffs are actually emergencies.

The 3 liberal justices will rule against him. Very likely Gorsuch and ACB and potentially Roberts too though not sure if on constitutional or IEEPA/statutory grounds. Alito and Kavanaugh seemed to be the most defensive of the policy, but I could also see them ruling against Trump saying that the president has the power to implement tariffs under IEEPA but only in emergencies. Thomas sounded more in the Alito/Kavanaugh camp though he talks less than others so he could be a wild card on constitutional grounds.

themissinglink said:

---

The betting odds favor the court ruling against Trump, but listening to some of the legal commentators, the big question is will there be a cohesive decision on constitutional grounds or will the court give a split/confusing ruling with some justices saying he has the power to tariff under IEEPA, but the existing tariffs are too broad and allow lower courts to interpret exactly which of the tariffs are actually emergencies.

The 3 liberal justices will rule against him. Very likely Gorsuch and ACB and potentially Roberts too though not sure if on constitutional or IEEPA/statutory grounds. Alito and Kavanaugh seemed to be the most defensive of the policy, but I could also see them ruling against Trump saying that the president has the power to implement tariffs under IEEPA but only in emergencies. Thomas sounded more in the Alito/Kavanaugh camp though he talks less than others so he could be a wild card on constitutional grounds.

---

Bet the farm on this.

Dreigh said:

---

Coming back to this thread as the Supreme Court considers the legality of Trump's across-the-board tariffs.

What are folks' thoughts/predictions on the Supreme Court's decision on this matter? And, if they strike down his tariffs, what do you think it actually means for the average American consumer?

---

Not much impact at all. Tariffs have largely been a non-factor at the consumer level with most not being passed on and the average tariff rate has been lower than advertised at about 12%. Consumers have only taken a small portion of that 12% hit. And now companies are saying that unwinding from tariffs won't be a big deal. We've only brought in somewhere around $150B in tariff revenue to date.

And now that Trump has made a trade deal with China, who was the primary focus of his global tariff campaign, he's given up on trying to change China internally. It's a pointless exercise and he's realized that now, so trade deal is now agreed to and we are moving on.

I'm not casting an opinion one way or the other - just sharing reality.

YouBet said:

---

Dreigh said:

---

Coming back to this thread as the Supreme Court considers the legality of Trump's across-the-board tariffs.

What are folks' thoughts/predictions on the Supreme Court's decision on this matter? And, if they strike down his tariffs, what do you think it actually means for the average American consumer?

---

Not much impact at all. Tariffs have largely been a non-factor at the consumer level with most not being passed on and the average tariff rate has been lower than advertised at about 12%. Consumers have only taken a small portion of that 12% hit. And now companies are saying that unwinding from tariffs won't be a big deal. We've only brought in somewhere around $150B in tariff revenue to date.

And now that Trump has made a trade deal with China, who was the primary focus of his global tariff campaign, he's given up on trying to change China internally. It's a pointless exercise and he's realized that now, so trade deal is now agreed to and we are moving on.

I'm not casting an opinion one way or the other - just sharing reality.

---

I think the elimination of the de minimis exemption for purchases below $800 was a pretty big deal. That might be outside of what's under consideration here though.

Dreigh said:

---

YouBet said:

---

Dreigh said:

---

Coming back to this thread as the Supreme Court considers the legality of Trump's across-the-board tariffs.

What are folks' thoughts/predictions on the Supreme Court's decision on this matter? And, if they strike down his tariffs, what do you think it actually means for the average American consumer?

---

Not much impact at all. Tariffs have largely been a non-factor at the consumer level with most not being passed on and the average tariff rate has been lower than advertised at about 12%. Consumers have only taken a small portion of that 12% hit. And now companies are saying that unwinding from tariffs won't be a big deal. We've only brought in somewhere around $150B in tariff revenue to date.

And now that Trump has made a trade deal with China, who was the primary focus of his global tariff campaign, he's given up on trying to change China internally. It's a pointless exercise and he's realized that now, so trade deal is now agreed to and we are moving on.

I'm not casting an opinion one way or the other - just sharing reality.

---

I think the elimination of the de minimis exemption for purchases below $800 was a pretty big deal. That might be outside of what's under consideration here though.

---

Yes, that was a big deal but probably should be considered separately. Granted, that primarily impacted China.

I love that this administration is now lowering tariffs on food products like bananas and coffee. But I was told that we didn't pay for the tariffs and that it wouldn't cause inflation. And they are definitely not taxes. ****ing amateurs.