From: j63840576@gmail.com   
      
   Stephen Miller, White House Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy and the   
   United States Homeland Security Advisor wrote:   
   > He now considers them fools and lapdogs for the Rhinos and the radical left   
   > Democrats.   
   >   
   > He needs to sign a Imperial Decree dissolving them.   
   >   
   > Tariffs ruling is major blow to Trump's second-term agenda of taxing the   
   > shit out of the middle class and poor to fund tax cuts for the 1%.   
   >   
   >   
   >   
   > Donald Trump had been warning for months that a Supreme Court decision like   
   > this would be catastrophic.   
   >   
   > If the court curtailed his ability to impose these tariffs, he had said, it   
   > would be an "economic and national security disaster".   
   >   
   > A six-justice majority of the Supreme Court, in ruling against the   
   > president on Friday, didn't care much about his concerns.   
   >   
   > Congress, not the president, has the power to impose tariffs, the justices   
   > ruled. And nothing in the law that the president based his tariffs on, the   
   > Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977, delegated such sweeping powers to   
   > Trump.   
   >   
   > Trump, in a hastily arranged press conference on Friday afternoon, lashed   
   > out at the justices who ruled against him. He said he was "ashamed" of the   
   > three conservatives who struck down his tariffs and called the three   
   > liberals on the court a "disgrace".   
   >   
   > Trump then promised to reimpose tariffs using presidential authority   
   > available under other laws, including a new temporary 10% global tariff   
   > that he said he would sign on Friday.   
   >   
   > The court's decision represents a rare check on this president's broad use   
   > of executive authority.   
   >   
   > A majority of the justices over the past year have shown a willingness to   
   > allow Trump to press ahead with his agenda, particularly on immigration and   
   > reshaping the federal government, even as legal challenges work their way   
   > through the court system.   
   >   
   >      Follow reaction to ruling as it happens   
   >      Trump tariffs ripped up global trade order. What now?   
   >   
   > This case, which was fast-tracked through the court system as an emergency,   
   > slams the door on one such expansive use of presidential authority.   
   >   
   > With several other major cases involving controversial uses of executive   
   > power, such as efforts to end birthright citizenship and to dismiss a   
   > Federal Reserve governor based on alleged improprieties, this may not be   
   > Trump's only setback in the coming months.   
   >   
   > At the very least, this decision weakens Trump's hand when trying to force   
   > other nations to make concessions to the US and tarnishes his veneer of   
   > invincibility.   
   >   
   > Weakness begets weakness, and America's trading partners may be emboldened   
   > to take a tougher line with the US now that the president's tariff powers   
   > have been curtailed.   
   >   
   > It also opens up the possibility that the Trump administration may have to   
   > give back much of the tariff revenue it collected over the past year.   
   >   
   > While the justices left this thorny issue to be decided by a lower court,   
   > Brett Kavanaugh in his dissent warned that the process is likely to be a   
   > "mess".   
   >   
   > The Trump administration had plenty of time to prepare for Friday's   
   > decision.   
   >   
   > Supreme Court precedent, and the attitude of many of the justices when the   
   > case was argued in court last November, indicated that an adverse outcome   
   > for the president was quite possible.   
   >   
   > Jamieson Greer, Trump's top trade adviser, said last month that the White   
   > House has "a lot of different options" on how to proceed if the tariffs   
   > were struck down.   
   >   
   > "The reality," he said, "is the president is going to have tariffs as part   
   > of his trade policy going forward."   
   >   
   > The other options that could be at Trump's disposal are more limited,   
   > however.   
   >   
   > They require government agencies to produce detailed reports to justify   
   > imposing tariffs, and they have limits on their scope and duration.   
   >   
   > Gone are the days when the president could threaten, or enact, triple-digit   
   > tariffs with the wave of a pen or the click of a Truth Social post.   
   > Getty Images A large container ship with lots of cargo on board is in   
   > foreground with Miami skyline behind Getty Images   
   > A Rotterdam container ship prepares to dock at Port Miami   
   >   
   > New tariffs will require a longer lead-in time before they are imposed.   
   >   
   > That could limit the kind of economic disruption that took place when the   
   > president announced his expansive "Liberation Day" tariffs last year, and   
   > would give other nations more time to prepare their responses.   
   >   
   > If Trump wants to restore his free hand to impose new tariffs, he could   
   > always ask Congress for the kind of explicit authorisation that the Supreme   
   > Court has said is necessary. But with narrow Republican majorities in the   
   > House and Senate, and midterm elections looming, the success of such a move   
   > seems unlikely.   
   >   
   > In fact, some of Trump's conservative allies in Congress may be breathing   
   > somewhat easier with this decision.   
   >   
   > The president's tariffs - and the costs they have imposed on consumers -   
   > have been unpopular among many Americans. Republican candidates in   
   > battleground states and congressional districts would have been open to   
   > Democratic attacks for supporting Trump's policies.   
   >   
   >   
   >   
   > That area of vulnerability has been reduced for now.   
   >   
   > Friday's decision will set up an awkward moment on Tuesday, when Trump   
   > delivers his annual State of the Union Address to a joint session of   
   > Congress. Traditionally, many of the Supreme Court justices sit in the   
   > front row of the chamber.   
   >   
   > The president, after spending months issuing dire warnings against the   
   > court, could stand eye-to-eye with the justices who eroded one of the key   
   > pillars of Trump's second-term agenda.   
   >   
   This is obvious fanfic. Trump is courting six of the supreme court   
   justices as we speak.   
      
   I know I stopped contributing to phone solicitors for the Democratic   
   Party after they told me that Trump had made a disastrous speech   
   yesterday but the news held nothing similar.   
      
   --   
   pBkHHoOIIn8   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)