SuzukiSavage.com - Print Page

SuzukiSavage.com
/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl
General Category >> Politics, Religion (Tall Table) >> SCOTUS tariff decision
/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1771604384

Message started by Eegore on 02/20/26 at 08:19:44

Title: SCOTUS tariff decision
Post by Eegore on 02/20/26 at 08:19:44

I agree with the SCOTUS. It is my opinion that I agree.

If the POTUS is going to use 50 U.S.C. §§ 1701 they should expect this type of response due to lack of specific language of powers. This is my opinion, is a predictable interpretation referencing Article III, which by the way has been called "Unconstitutional" by one member here, which I imagine is now magically completely Constitutional by their assessment.

I wonder what legislative avenue will be used to restore tariffs.

https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/LSB11281

Title: Re: SCOTUS tariff decision
Post by Needles on 02/20/26 at 09:14:30

Restoring them is not going to happen. Not even counting the time it would take to vote on the many that Trumpedo illegally imposed, they don't have the votes to push them through Congress, even if they all supported them. A lot of the pro tariff morons are not so pro tariff now. Trumpedo is a two-time failure.

8-) 8-) 8-) 8-) 8-)

Title: Re: SCOTUS tariff decision
Post by zevenenergie on 02/20/26 at 09:32:19

I'm also curious, because if it doesn't work, Donald Trump's policy will be in shambles.

And America with it, because what will we do in the coming years?

I wouldn't be surprised that the rule of law as we know it is past its prime. Not that I'm a proponent of that, but it does point to it.

What does the rule of law even mean, considering the number of arrests in the Epstein case?

I understand that Trump is being recalled, but it seems like a decision where the Supreme Court wants to keep power out of Trump's hands, which is also what the law is intended for, of course. But times have changed, and it would have been legally possible to rule differently.

I believe the Supreme Court is being unnecessarily harsh here and is placing the consequences entirely on Trump, and that makes it a political decision for me rather than a legal one. The Supreme Court must, of course, adhere to previous jurisprudence, but again, times are different now. All institutions are faltering, and this decision during the Epsein file crisis...

I wouldn't be surprised if the rule of law is seriously undermined by this action, or by the lack of action.
It is clear that there is a network (an elite) of very powerful people who are in control and are absolutely criminal. What will the higher court do about this?

Title: Re: SCOTUS tariff decision
Post by zevenenergie on 02/20/26 at 09:55:08

0B202021292036450 wrote:

You can be against Trump, but his tariff policy is an absolute asset for America. But if you're blind because your opinion is more important to you than what's actually happening, you'll never see this.

You're essentially sticking your head up your own ass and because the smell seems familiar, you think you’re right.

Title: Re: SCOTUS tariff decision
Post by Eegore on 02/20/26 at 10:26:41

I'm also curious, because if it doesn't work, Donald Trump's policy will be in shambles.

And America with it, because what will we do in the coming years?

What we did before. The US was hardly in economic duress before tariffs - but if you like Trump the US economy was doomed, and if you don't like Trump it was the best economy in recorded history.

I understand that Trump is being recalled, but it seems like a decision where the Supreme Court wants to keep power out of Trump's hands, which is also what the law is intended for, of course. But times have changed, and it would have been legally possible to rule differently.

I disagree. This very specifically follows Article III of the US Constitution. Trump, and really his advisors since we all know he has no idea how the US Government works, should have used a process that was more likely to succeed instead of expecting the SCOTUS to ignore law.

I believe the Supreme Court is being unnecessarily harsh here and is placing the consequences entirely on Trump, and that makes it a political decision for me rather than a legal one. The Supreme Court must, of course, adhere to previous jurisprudence, but again, times are different now.

This argument is no different than Needles argument that US law doesn't apply because things are "different" now. The US Constitution has Amendments for a reason. It's so we have a consistent rule of law that is flexible but applied equally and not a rule of law that applies differently to lets say Trump, but not any other POTUS.

All institutions are faltering, and this decision during the Epsein file crisis...

Epstein has nothing to do with this. Another staple of US law is not bringing in unrelated aspects to undermine the equal application. If I am being sued for fraudulently over charging a customer, I can't defend myself by saying he is a ped o phile, or saying bigger companies are more evil than me.

This post is an opinion.

Title: Re: SCOTUS tariff decision
Post by WebsterMark on 02/20/26 at 10:44:53

In his descent, Brett Kavanaugh pointed out that there are many other federal statutes that the Trump administration could simply pivot to, and essentially leave everything as it is right now.

Title: Re: SCOTUS tariff decision
Post by zevenenergie on 02/20/26 at 11:27:50

lets hope so.

Title: Re: SCOTUS tariff decision
Post by zevenenergie on 02/20/26 at 15:26:11

What we see on the political stage isn't how power operates; it's not how decisions are made. The real power lies with the network that's now becoming visible; that's where decisions are made.
The Supreme Court is trying to block something with the idea that the law protects the president from too much power.
That's the rub. The government is being shut down while the corrupt network remains unstoppable.
If you believe the charade, then you haven't grasped the implications of the Epstein affair.

To me, that means the institution of the Supreme Court and the rule of law will be dismantled, just as all other institutions have already fallen.

Life reveals all our illusions by letting them fall away one by one. And then we watch how people hold their ground. Status means nothing anymore. Being is the only thing that matters.

Title: Re: SCOTUS tariff decision
Post by Eegore on 02/20/26 at 19:30:57

I think you are overselling it. My opinion is you are overselling it. In a few years Trump will be gone, new SCOTUS rulings will happen, a whole other line of doomsday actions will happen.

I don't know what "all other institutions" are to you, but I imagine plenty still exist.

This post is an opinion.

Title: Re: SCOTUS tariff decision
Post by zevenenergie on 02/20/26 at 23:47:11

They still exist, but no one appreciates them anymore. This means they have no value, no prestige, and no impact whatsoever. The church, the mainstream media, the police. These used to be literally churches and cathedrals. They had authority.

Now that it's becoming clear that the justice system is leaving the elite alone because the elite is pulling the strings and isn't being disgraced by these sacred institutions, the Supreme Court and the rule of law will also collapse.If they haven't already collapsed before our very eyes.

I can also add the Royal House in England to that list. A royal was arrested this week.
The king saved face, but in doing so, he robbed the institution: the Royal House, of its magic.
He prevented its dismantling by the people, but it was dismantled.

AI isn't going to tell you this. Google isn't either.

AI is a revenue model and not designed for the well-being of humanity. You'll find the common denominator there. And it turns out, for example, that Google search results about Epstein combined with child abuse returned no results.
And Google provides infrastructure (cloud/compute) to OpenAI.

Title: Re: SCOTUS tariff decision
Post by WebsterMark on 02/21/26 at 05:15:21

From the Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent

“Let's be clear about what today's ruling WAS and what it WASN'T. Despite the misplaced GLOATING from Democrats, ill-informed media outlets, and the very people who gutted our industrial base, the Court did not rule against President Trump's tariffs."

"Six justices simply ruled that IEEPA authorities cannot be used to raise even $1 of revenue."

"This administration will invoke alternative legal authorities to replace the IEEPA tariffs."

"We will be leveraging Section 232 and Section 301 tariff authorities that have been validated through thousands of legal challenges."

"Treasury's estimates show that the use of Section 122 authority, combined with potentially enhanced Section 232 and Section 301 tariffs, will result in virtually unchanged tariff revenue in 2026."

Title: Re: SCOTUS tariff decision
Post by Eegore on 02/21/26 at 09:02:15

The real problem for us in my opinion, is going to be Trump's inability to act like an adult or the strategist he claims he is.

Instead he already took it personal and wants to retaliate instead of use an effective strategy. All the Trump administration needs to do is lay off the war powers approach and just use standard economic law.

Then you get nonsense like people claiming the US legal system will completely collapse because the SCOTUS used the Articles in the US Constitution to make a single ruling that they do not like, because it is against what Trump wants, not because its actually wrong legislatively.

Title: Re: SCOTUS tariff decision
Post by thumperclone on 02/21/26 at 10:24:33

he doesn't know what a free-market economy is
the king has no____________.

Title: Re: SCOTUS tariff decision
Post by Needles on 02/21/26 at 12:25:44

"You can be against Trump, but his tariff policy is an absolute asset for America."

That's absolute bullsh1t. Tariffs are what's making things too expensive. If you're income depends on Wall Street, you're NOT the 99%, which has an average life savings of less than $1000. Tariffs are the tools of idiots and pedophiles.

::) ::) ::) ::) ::)