- 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: SCOTUS Tariff Ruling is in: 6-3 against tariffs.
Posted on 2/20/26 at 9:56 am to Fun Bunch
Posted on 2/20/26 at 9:56 am to Fun Bunch
quote:
Broad sweeping tariffs is not even remotely a traditional conservative opinion
Wait what?
It was the very original way our country's government raised revenue and dates back to 1790.
Surely more of a conservative idea than revenue generation ideas that came after...
0
Posted on 2/20/26 at 9:56 am to Fun Bunch
quote:The hell you are.
I was being kind. I am more conservative (traditional) than the current president. Probably much farther right than you.
Posted on 2/20/26 at 9:56 am to baybeefeetz
quote:Like with the DOGE cuts? Yeah, good luck.
Just means he needs some legal support. You know. From our elected representatives.
Posted on 2/20/26 at 9:56 am to Fuzzy Dunlop
quote:
I mean the whole thing is being run as if it were a reality tv show so it makes sense that people who didn't use to take part in the process would now view it through that lens
The transparency is the only dramatic thing about this admin. Everything else about what they do is SOP if you are able to step out of the need for the drama.
Posted on 2/20/26 at 9:57 am to Deuces
quote:
There’s most likely a work around for this.
As far as tariffs already imposed, I would insist and refuse to reverse those, as it was not the law the land at that time. The Judicial and Executive branches are equal.
Posted on 2/20/26 at 9:57 am to No Colors
quote:
Why can't he use Congress, like the constitution demands?
Using a different Act that authorizes Tariffs would be using Congress.
Posted on 2/20/26 at 9:57 am to AlterEd
quote:And you won't be getting your $2,000 tariff check.
Ok. And?
Sorry/not sorry.
Posted on 2/20/26 at 9:58 am to Fun Bunch
quote:Yes. We righly decried when Biden's abuse of COVID "emergency" power grabs got shot down. This decision is narrow enough it's simliar. The executive branch isn't losing any power it had. It just doesn't get any new ones.
Once its expanded its hard to contract it, and there will be a time when the Dems are in control again. And when they are in power, they don't pussyfoot around. They go all in
Posted on 2/20/26 at 9:58 am to Indefatigable
quote:
Yea. I bet clarifying this legal issue was the goal all along.
That's generally why laws are tested.
quote:
Because spending a quarter of the term on that endeavor is good strategy that accomplished a lot?
The tariffs were in place. The realignment has not changed. Tariffs will be in place.
What time was lost?
Posted on 2/20/26 at 9:58 am to BCreed1
quote:
He could have gone straight to proven methods used by the last 7 presidents.
But he didn’t, for no ostensible reason, and now has to start over and deal with the headache and repayments.
Again, for what purpose?
Posted on 2/20/26 at 9:58 am to BCreed1
quote:
He could have gone straight to proven methods used by the last 7 presidents.
By choosing not to go any of those other routes he created chaos in the end. Chaos that may now force us to pay back some tariffs and closed small businesses down. I’m not sure how that gets justified.
Posted on 2/20/26 at 9:59 am to blueboy
quote:
Just means he needs some legal support. You know. From our elected representatives.
Like with the DOGE cuts? Yeah, good luck.
Yep. We are so fricked. Congress is never going to do anything that doesn't personally serve them so there is no way they would ever back Trump using tariffs the way he has as a negotiation tool and to level out trade.
Posted on 2/20/26 at 9:59 am to RollTide4547
quote:
The hell you are.
I almost certainly am, but alright.
What do you think I am arguing in this thread?
Its simply a matter of legality. The IEEPA did not give him the legal authority to do what he did. I have argued that since literally the time he did this.
Other Acts might, and he should do that.
Progressives are the ones that march lockstep and never question their Dear Leaders no matter what. Conservatives don't do that, perhaps to our detriment, but that isn't going to change due to the nature of the thought process.
Posted on 2/20/26 at 10:00 am to RidiculousHype
quote:
Congress, not POTUS
Very few things in this country are only enforceable by one person or body.
Posted on 2/20/26 at 10:00 am to BCreed1
quote:
That's generally why laws are tested.
Testing black letter law on whether or not it expressly authorizes actions is not something usually done, no. The words are there or they aren’t on this issue. It was silly and half-baked and done because Trump saw it as the fastest way to levy the tariffs.
quote:
What time was lost?
10 months of collecting money that now has to be paid back.
Posted on 2/20/26 at 10:00 am to Reagan80
quote:
Trade deals based on tariffs undone too?
No our wonderful non-partisan congress will come together for the good of the country and make Trumps bargaining skill look an amateur.
Posted on 2/20/26 at 10:00 am to stout
quote:
Yep. We are so fricked. Congress is never going to do anything that doesn't personally serve them so there is no way they would ever back Trump using tariffs the way he has as a negotiation tool and to level out trade.
This. Congress is asshoe.
Posted on 2/20/26 at 10:00 am to ChineseBandit58
Don't lose hope. Go read the news report I posted In my last reply here..
It's not all tariffs it's the one towards Mexico and Canada and China. Which are a biggie of course....
But it Is as if Trump used the tariffs as a negotiating tactic in geopolitics fighting them. SCOTUS shoots him down. He can readdress this and add different language.
I think China needs addressed head on. Call them out for their tactics. Demand they pony up for our revenue loss during Covid. Weed out all of their infiltrators within our own intelligence apparatus...
But that's another thread.
It's not all tariffs it's the one towards Mexico and Canada and China. Which are a biggie of course....
But it Is as if Trump used the tariffs as a negotiating tactic in geopolitics fighting them. SCOTUS shoots him down. He can readdress this and add different language.
I think China needs addressed head on. Call them out for their tactics. Demand they pony up for our revenue loss during Covid. Weed out all of their infiltrators within our own intelligence apparatus...
But that's another thread.
This post was edited on 2/20/26 at 10:03 am
Posted on 2/20/26 at 10:01 am to stout
quote:Naw. Look, if we're going to have tariffs, we should have them in a way that will be stable and sensible so those that invest CAPEX will have enough assurances to actually invest.
This country is finished
The globalists won
That was never going to happen as long as the president can wake up and decide what the tariffs are going to be on any given day.
Like so many things Congress needs to act. Trump's inability to work with congress or build a coalition (even in his own party) is hurting him.
This post was edited on 2/20/26 at 10:01 am
Posted on 2/20/26 at 10:01 am to N.O. via West-Cal
quote:
Final thought: who on earth advised Trump to go issuing tariffs willy-nilly under a statute that did not mention tariffs when other statutes, which clearly delegate the right to set tariffs, could have been used for 90+% of what the administration wanted?
So it could be codified?
Page 11 of 26
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News