The U.S. Supreme Court ruled today, by a vote of 6-3, to overturn Trump’s unilateral tariffs on other nations. Three Republican-appointed justices–Chief Justice John Roberts, Justice Neil Gorsuch, and Justice Amy Coney Barrett–voted with the Court’s three liberal justices.
Trump responded with fury. He believed that his appointees owed him their loyalty and their votes. He accused them of a lack of patriotism and even insinuated that they were advancing the interests of a foreign power.
He wrote on his social media site Truth Social that the decision was wrong, and he insulted those Republican justices who voted against his tariffs. He must have been especially angry at Justice Gorsuch and Justice Barret, whom he appointed.
Trump made clear that he intended to circumvent the Court’s decision by relying on other laws. As Trump often says, “Trump was right about everthing.”
He wrote:
The Supreme Court’s Ruling on TARIFFS is deeply disappointing! I am ashamed of certain Members of the Court for not having the Courage to do what is right for our Country. I would like to thank and congratulate Justices Thomas, Alito, and Kavanaugh for your Strength, Wisdom, and Love of our Country, which is right now very proud of you. When you read the dissenting opinions, there is no way that anyone can argue against them. Foreign Countries that have been ripping us off for years are ecstatic, and dancing in the streets — But they won’t be dancing for long! The Democrats on the Court are thrilled, but they will automatically vote “NO” against ANYTHING that makes America Strong and Healthy Again. They, also, are a Disgrace to our Nation. Others think they’re being “politically correct,” which has happened before, far too often, with certain Members of this Court when, in fact, they’re just FOOLS and “LAPDOGS” for the RINOS and Radical Left Democrats and, not that this should have anything to do with it, very unpatriotic, and disloyal to the Constitution. It is my opinion that the Court has been swayed by Foreign Interests, and a Political Movement that is far smaller than people would think — But obnoxious, ignorant, and loud!
This was an important case to me, more as a symbol of Economic and National Security, than anything else. The Good News is that there are methods, practices, Statutes, and other Authorities, as recognized by the entire Court and Congress, that are even stronger than the IEEPA TARIFFS, available to me as President of the United States of America and, in actuality, I was very modest in my “ask” of other Countries and Businesses because I wanted to do nothing that could sway the decision that has been rendered by the Court.
I have very effectively utilized TARIFFS over the past year to, MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN. Our Stock Market has just recently broken the 50,000 mark on the DOW and, simultaneously, 7,000 on the S&P, two numbers that everybody thought, upon our Landslide Election Victory, could not be attained until the very end of my Administration — Four years! TARIFFS have, likewise, been used to end five of the eight Wars that I settled, have given us Great National Security and, together with our Strong Border, reduced Fentanyl coming into our Country by 30%, when I use them as a penalty against Countries illegally sending this poison to us. All of those TARIFFS remain, but other alternatives will now be used to replace the ones that the Court incorrectly rejected.
To show you how ridiculous the opinion is, the Court said that I’m not allowed to charge even $1 DOLLAR to any Country under IEEPA, I assume to protect other Countries, not the United States which they should be interested in protecting — But I am allowed to cut off any and all Trade or Business with that same Country, even imposing a Foreign Country destroying embargo, and do anything else I want to do to them — How nonsensical is that? They are saying that I have the absolute right to license, but not the right to charge a license fee. What license has ever been issued without the right to charge a fee? But now the Court has given me the unquestioned right to ban all sorts of things from coming into our Country, a much more powerful Right than many people thought we had.
Our Country is the “HOTTEST” anywhere in the World, but now, I am going in a different direction, which is even stronger than our original choice. As Justice Kavanaugh wrote in his Dissent:
“Although I firmly disagree with the Court’s holding today, the decision might not substantially constrain a President’s ability to order tariffs going forward. That is because numerous other federal statutes authorize the President to impose tariffs and might justify most (if not all) of the tariffs issued in this case…Those statutes include, for example, the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 (Section 232); the Trade Act of 1974 (Sections 122, 201, and 301); and the Tariff Act of 1930 (Section 338).”
Thank you Justice Kavanaugh!
In actuality, while I am sure they did not mean to do so, the Supreme Court’s decision today made a President’s ability to both regulate Trade, and impose TARIFFS, more powerful and crystal clear, rather than less. There will no longer be any doubt, and the Income coming in, and the protection of our Companies and Country, will actually increase because of this decision. Based on longstanding Law and Hundreds of Victories to the contrary, the Supreme Court did not overrule TARIFFS, they merely overruled a particular use of IEEPA TARIFFS. The ability to block, embargo, restrict, license, or impose any other condition on a Foreign Country’s ability to conduct Trade with the United States under IEEPA, has been fully confirmed by this decision. In order to protect our Country, a President can actually charge more TARIFFS than I was charging in the past under the various other TARIFF authorities, which have also been confirmed, and fully allowed.
Therefore, effective immediately, all National Security TARIFFS, Section 232 and existing Section 301 TARIFFS, remain in place, and in full force and effect. Today I will sign an Order to impose a 10% GLOBAL TARIFF, under Section 122, over and above our normal TARIFFS already being charged, and we are also initiating several Section 301 and other Investigations to protect our Country from unfair Trading practices. Thank you for your attention to this matter. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!
PRESIDENT DONALD J. TRUMP

Trump’s braggadocio about stock market highs in 2025 [connecting them to tariff effects] are belied by the jump in markets after SCOTUS decision rejecting his tariff program today. As of 10:30 am—30 mins after the ruling was announced– The S&P 500 was up 0.6%, and Nasdaq up 1%. European auto shares and U.S.-listed shares of stock markets from South Korea to India rallied.
As to his defiant claim he’ll keep current tariffs in place [while raising them globally by 10%], we’ll see. He knows suits will immediately be filed against every tariff based on his faux IEPPA basis, and will be won promptly. Then (if he insists), every IEPPA tariff will have to be refiled against one of these other laws he claims support them – then lawsuits—then more SCOTUS decisions. Meanwhile he’ll be fighting corporate lawsuits trying to claw back what they spent on illegal tariffs.
My guess? He’ll succumb, while distracting populace with the next outrage [perhaps in Iran (shudder)].
LikeLike
TRUMP HAS PUT THE REPUBLICAN PARTY INTO A VERY BAD POSITION FOR THE MIDTERM ELECTIONS because the tariffs he has put into effect using Section 122 of the Tariff Act of 1974 automatically expire in 5 months (150 days) and in order to continue after that must be renewed by an act of Congress.
THAT MEANS that 5 months from now, just as the races for the midterm elections are heating up, the Republicans in Congress will be faced with the decision to either keep the tariffs on place, thereby imposing taxes on voters as well as ongoing higher consumer goods prices, or repeal the tariffs and anger Trump, thereby angering all of his mindless MAGA minions who worship him regardless of the cost to themselves.
It’s a lose/lose situation for congressional Republicans.
Thank you, Trump.
The “Section 301 tariffs” Trump refers to are in the 1974 Trade Act and are designed to target nations using “discriminatory practices” against the U.S. But, not only is the scope of Section 301 narrow, the determination of what constitutes “discriminatory practices” is very debatable in court and, unlike with Trump’s dictatorial Executive Orders, would immediately be stalled by court challenges.
Trump could also attempt to use Section 338 of the 1930 Trade Act that allows imposition of tariffs for “unfair practices” against the U.S., but such an attempt would also be immediately stalled for the same reason as would Section 301 tariffs under the 1974 Trade Act.
Trump could also try to use Section 232 of the 1962 Trade Act which allows tariffs for “national security” threats, but such an attempt would also end up stalled by court challenges.
NOT ONLY WILL THE UPCOMING NEED FOR CONGRESSIONAL APPROVAL for continuing the Section 122 tariffs put congressional Republicans in a political bind just prior to the midterm elections, but Trump’s vile attacks on the Supreme Court Justices who ruled against his Executive Order tariffs can have a deep unseen impact on the future rulings of those Justices.
IT’S BAD ENOUGH that Trump basically called those Justices traitors to our nation, declaring they are “fools”, “unpatriotic”, “disloyal to our Constitution”, and “a disgrace to our nation” — Trump got even more personal by telling reporters at the White House that the Justices’ own families should be ashamed of them because they are “an embarrassment to their families.”
Declaring that their own families should be ashamed of the went OVER THE LINE.
THAT was deeply personal.
THAT was trying to turn the Justices’ own families against them.
THAT won’t be forgotten by the Justices — even by those Justices who weren’t targeted because THAT reveals just how very vile Trump is and how any further support for that vile person is for the detriment of our nation.
THAT is a Turning Point.
(You may copy this and share it.)
LikeLiked by 3 people
I just don’t understand his need to have tariffs. It has done nothing to bring down the national debt. He has verbally spent it on five different things but actually spent it on nothing. But he sure panics when it has been struck down.
Notice there is no talk of refunds.
LikeLiked by 1 person
How nice that Chief Justice Roberts, Justice Gorsuch, and Justice Coney Barrett actually found their minds, their hearts and their spines! I think this is good reason to celebrate, but now we have to hope that they are humane and brave enough to do the same thing at other times when the malignant narcissist is acting like he, his desires, his power and fascism are much more important than the people, democracy, the rule of law and our Constitution.
LikeLike
This SCOTUS ruling was a deserved rebuke to Trump, similar to what happened to Biden when SCOTUS ruled that only Congress had the power to forgive student loan debt: a President did not have unilateral authority to do that, which even Biden acknowledged until he thought he could gain political points by such an action. This blog then took Biden’s side, of course. “I will never criticize Joe Biden” – Diane Ravitch.
As always, Trump’s reaction was beneath the dignity of any President. He personally attacked the conservative Justices in the majority, claiming that their opinions were derived from corrupt motives, not from adherence to their judicial principles. Just like the way this blog has criticized those same Justices that are praised in this posting. Partisanship over philosophical consistency, always and forever.
LikeLike
It looks like BS coming from a partisan troll who thinks he/she appears different from other trolls. Dissing people for being partisan and acting as if you are the only one who is not is a bad joke that’s been used by trolls many times before. Blaming folks for expressing their opinions is neither original nor persuasive. It just makes you look like a self-righteous, judgemental, ignorant fool.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I notice that you did not address the substance of my comment where I criticized actions of both Trump and Biden. You just launched a personal attack. How Trump-like of you.
LikeLike
When you take cheap shots at people, you should expect to get squarely hit back, because some of us have been here for over a decade we’re tired of insults from trolls, so what goes around comes around.
LikeLiked by 1 person
cx: sb are not we’re
LikeLike
sb: “and are” (not just are.)
LikeLike
This SCOTUS ruling is not similar to “what happened to Biden when SCOTUS ruled that only Congress had the power to forgive student loan debt,” because that was not what was ruled.
Most of the ruling focused on how the 2003 HEROES Act—on which Biden’s “Plan A” student loan forgiveness was based—did not in fact support his proposal. It did not have a comparable size or scope. Conclusion being that Biden plan was of sufficient size and scope [estimated cost $430 billion, affecting most outstanding loans] to require Congressional approval/ specific appropriation. They also noted that previous regulatory changes to student loan program that resulted in additional fed expenditure fit within the strictures of regulatory changes to other govt programs, i.e., “modest adjustments and additions to existing provision.”
The tariff ruling is quite different. It is based on plain-language Constitutional content. Only Congress has the power to establish taxes [or tariffs – which are a form of taxes imposed on the public].
There is nothing in the Constitution about the degree to which Congress may delegate regulatory authority to the executive. SCOTUS is on somewhat thin ice here. The Higher Ed Act sets a lot of specifics on student loan programs, but also leaves a lot of details to Dept of Ed. SCOTUS has to depend on its quite new [2021-2022] “Major Questions Doctrine”– unmentioned in this ruling but clearly operative here—to make its ruling. So, a lot of mentioning of “$430 billion[!]” to indicate this is beyond the pale—i.e., a “major question”—but no definitive details forthcoming. At this point, we’re all dependent on whatever $ amount SCOTUS in its infinite wisdom determines is a “modest adjustment and addition,” or constitutes a Major Question.
LikeLike
Thanks, Ginny.
Your commentary is always helpful.
LikeLike
Thanks, Diane!
LikeLike