- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: 77% chance the SC rules tariffs are illegal, possible ruling this Friday
Posted on 1/6/26 at 5:08 pm to Bass Tiger
Posted on 1/6/26 at 5:08 pm to Bass Tiger
Will I get my money back for paying tariffs. Democrats should be deported.
0
Posted on 1/6/26 at 5:12 pm to VoxDawg
quote:
Per a degenerate gambler site.
That eye patch just unloaded cash on, so it must be a lock. he doesnt bet on stock losers, errrr, i meaan he's a good stock picker, errr
Posted on 1/6/26 at 5:13 pm to thejuiceisloose
quote:Has nothing to do with it. The case isn't about whether all tariffs are legal. Holy shite.
Umm we don't have jurisdiction over those other countries
Posted on 1/6/26 at 5:14 pm to hawgfaninc
23% says they won't!!!
I'm going with the 23%.
I'm going with the 23%.
Posted on 1/6/26 at 5:19 pm to RohanGonzales
quote:
How is that 77% calculated?
Good question. It all comes down to how the Justices vote. The only thing I can think of, if this is a legit prediction, is that they're basing it on the questions asked and any comments made during the trial by the 9 people who will be making the decision.
It's crazy that they even took this case , imo.
This post was edited on 1/6/26 at 5:20 pm
Posted on 1/6/26 at 5:22 pm to KCT
quote:
just what I was thinking.
It's sad that America seems intent on being its own worst enemy.
Zero chance they rule against the country.
I expect it to be 6-3 with the usual whack jobs dissenting. Maybe 5-4 with Roberts being a turncoat again.
Posted on 1/6/26 at 5:23 pm to Pfft
quote:
So all tarriffs that other countries impose are illegal as well?
Only cucked Americans want other countries to be able to ruin our businesses and not be able to compete in the global markets.
Posted on 1/6/26 at 5:23 pm to PurpleandGeauld
The Executive branch cannot levy a tariff without a statute enabling it to do so.
Congress passed the International Emergency Economic Powers Act LINK
Trump claims this act allows him to tariff and he based his "Liberation Day" tariffs on authority given him by this legislation.
Some businesses filed suit saying the legislation does not give the President the power to tariff.
SCOTUS will decide.
Congress passed the International Emergency Economic Powers Act LINK
Trump claims this act allows him to tariff and he based his "Liberation Day" tariffs on authority given him by this legislation.
Some businesses filed suit saying the legislation does not give the President the power to tariff.
SCOTUS will decide.
Posted on 1/6/26 at 5:25 pm to TigerAxeOK
quote:
And not even the tariffs in place by the US are illegal. Only the ones levied by President Trump.
Duh!
Your attempt at sarcasm is actually more accurate than 90% of this thread. Not tariffs in general. Not other countries. Not even all U.S. tariffs. Just these specific tariffs, imposed by this president, using this authority.
That’s what SCOTUS is ruling on.
Posted on 1/6/26 at 5:26 pm to IvoryBillMatt
quote:
The means used by Trump were probably not legal. He got bad advice and invoked the wrong way to impose the tariffs without Congress.
Didn’t he use tariffs the same way in his first term? Shouldn’t Congress and the SC have terminated those tariffs during the Biden Administration? And as I recall Biden never removed the tariffs Trump put on China in his first term. I think he might have even increased them, if I recall correctly.
Posted on 1/6/26 at 5:32 pm to Lg
quote:SCOTUS can't rule on something unless it's brought before them.
Shouldn’t Congress and the SC have terminated those tariffs during the Biden Administration?
Posted on 1/6/26 at 5:39 pm to Lg
quote:
Didn’t he use tariffs the same way in his first term?
I do not think so. Most of his first term tariffs were either based on a statute allowing the President to tariff when national security is at risk or as part of the International Trade Commission program.
Posted on 1/6/26 at 5:40 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
You view the Executive pretext in each case as equivalently founded?
They all dealt with the same dispute, literally, that I included in that post.
Why would one example of the executive acting outside of statutory authority be different than another? It's the same fundamental conflict.
Posted on 1/6/26 at 5:40 pm to justjoe906
quote:
If so will all the money collected from the tariffs have to be paid back?
That will be the most interesting thing. That money will be paid back to the companies that had to pay the higher tariffs. The consumers who had to pay higher price on goods from the companies who raised their cost will get no relief. Many of these price hikes from tariff's have been in place for over 6 months. It will be interesting to see what companies who raised prices actually lower them if it does happen.
Posted on 1/6/26 at 5:40 pm to PsychTiger
quote:
. You must be really happy about your success.
It's incredibly annoying, actually.
Posted on 1/6/26 at 5:42 pm to RohanGonzales
quote:
How is that 77% calculated?
Does anyone commenting care?
the same way any predictive model is created?
Posted on 1/6/26 at 5:43 pm to hawgfaninc
quote:
It’ll be interesting to see how Trump fights it, if ruled illegal.
They’ll reimpose the tariffs citing a different law that give the president authority to impose tariffs
Posted on 1/6/26 at 5:44 pm to northshorebamaman
quote:
SCOTUS can't rule on something unless it's brought before them.
I understand that. But if tariffs are so terrible, kind of strange that no one brought it before them in his first term or that Biden didn’t do away with them during his term.
Posted on 1/6/26 at 5:46 pm to Demonbengal
My $1 law degree guess is that if SCOTUS rules against the Administration that will be it.
After that, any litigant will have to prove actual damages if it is going to get any tariff refund.
So a company that raised its prices to cover tariffs will not get an award. A company who ate a reduction in profit due to the tariffs could recover.
After that, any litigant will have to prove actual damages if it is going to get any tariff refund.
So a company that raised its prices to cover tariffs will not get an award. A company who ate a reduction in profit due to the tariffs could recover.
Posted on 1/6/26 at 5:49 pm to tigersbh
quote:
Why are Democrats even taking this to court in the first place?
Trump could cure cancer and the democrats would fight it.
Page 3 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News