Tag: john roberts
Supreme Court Strikes Down Trump Tariffs In Major Blow To White House

Supreme Court Strikes Down Trump Tariffs In Major Blow To White House

In a 6-3 ruling. the Supreme Court has rejected the legal basis for President Donald Trump’s sweeping global tariffs, imposed on “Liberation Day” in April 2025.

“The Supreme Court has struck down President Trump’s tariff authority, saying his claim of emergency authority to issue sweeping tariffs to America’s trading partners was unlawful,” Politico’s Kyle Cheney reports.

NBC News called it a “major blow” to President Trump.

During oral arguments, justices appeared skeptical of the Trump arguments. Chief Justice John Roberts said that the tariffs were “an imposition of taxes on Americans and that has always been the core power of Congress,” as Axios reported.

President Trump has repeatedly argued that his reciprocal tariffs — which studies show are almost entirely paid by American consumers and businesses — were necessary for national security. The administration relied on an obscure provision of U.S. trade law that allows a president to impose tariffs without congressional approval if imports are deemed a threat to national security. Critics, however, argued that the statute was never intended to justify sweeping, permanent global tariffs.

Trump’s public statements repeatedly broadened his rationale. At the beginning of the year, declaring the Supreme Court’s impending decision would be “their most important (ever!) Decision,” he claimed the tariffs “have rescued our Economy and National Security.”

Last month, Trump warned that “if the Supreme Court rules against the United States of America on this National Security bonanza, WE’RE SCREWED!”

As recently as Thursday, Trump lambasted the high court for taking, as he put it, “forever,” to release its decision.

“And to think I have to be, in the United States Supreme Court for many, many months, waiting for a decision on tariffs — without tariffs, this country would be in such trouble right now,” Trump said.

“I’ve been waiting forever. Forever. And the language is clear that I have the right to do it as president. I have the right to put tariffs on for national security purposes, countries that have been ripping us off.”

Just weeks ago, Trump told Fox Business that he had had an “emergency call from, I believe, the prime minister of Switzerland, and she was very aggressive. Nice, but very aggressive.”

“Again and again and again. I couldn’t get her off the phone,” the president continued, as The Hill reported. “So [the tariffs were] at 30 percent, and I didn’t really like the way she talked to us, and so instead of giving her a reduction, I raised it to 39 percent.”

The president has also suggested that there is so much money coming into the Treasury from tariffs that he would be sending tariff “dividend” checks to Americans — a claim he appeared to have forgotten about last month when asked by a reporter.

Trump has also claimed that if the Court struck down his tariffs, the U.S. would not be in a position to provide refunds, which could run between $100 billion and $200 billion. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, however, stated that providing refunds would be possible.

It has been estimated that tariffs are costing the average American family between $1,300 and nearly $5,000 annually.

Economist Justin Wolfers, when asked about the effectiveness of Trump’s tariffs, told CBC News, “If the trade deficit this year is bigger than it was last year, and this year we have high tariffs and a trade war and last year we didn’t, I guess it doesn’t require a lot of fancy statistics to infer that Trump’s tariffs didn’t help the trade deficit.”

On Friday, he wrote, “We had this big lousy trade war, and we’ve got nothing to show for it.”

The Wall Street Journal editorial board on Thursday wrote, “If your tariff policy is so unpopular that you have to bully the central bank into not talking about it, maybe it’s time for a new policy.”

Reprinted with permission from Alternet

How Will Chief Justice Roberts Tame The Monster He Created?

How Will Chief Justice Roberts Tame The Monster He Created?

The Constitution does not have a clause which states specifically, “either we have laws and follow them, or we don’t.” The closest the Constitution comes is in Article II, Section 3, where it is mandated that “the president shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.” This clause is violated each day when Donald Trump awakens and opens his eyes. He committed the offense of insider trading last week, when two hours before he relaxed his onerous tariffs, he posted on Truth Social that it was “a good time to buy!” signaling to his friends that stocks would be recovering from the dive they took when he imposed the tariffs in the first place.

Trump is running a lawless presidency right out in the open and announcing that fact practically every day because he has been given permission by the Supreme Court to ignore not only norms and traditions observed by previous presidents, but the law itself.

Today, a law-abiding (if undocumented) migrant is the victim of Trump’s blatantly illegal behavior. The most frightening thing about the first three months of Trump’s second term is not knowing where we stand. Unless and until Chief Justice John Roberts decides to step up and draw some lines, there are no limits on Donald Trump. Even if that happens, it remains to be seen whether Trump will deign to adhere to judicially imposed limits. He is already in violation of two district court orders and one order by the Supreme Court itself.

We are learning a grim lesson: Democracies don’t necessarily die in darkness but in the sunlight of outright defiance of the law by a president charged with its enforcement.

Reprinted with permission from Lucian Truscott Newsletter.

Top GOP Senator: Republican Threat To Impeach Judge Is 'Idiotic'

Top GOP Senator: Republican Threat To Impeach Judge Is 'Idiotic'

Egged on by wannabe dictator Donald Trump, House Republicans are pushing GOP leadership to let them embark on impeachment proceedings against federal judges who dare to rule against their Dear Leader—a time-consuming and destined-to-fail effort that harms the rule of law and could even wound the Republican Party in elections moving forward.

Multiple Republican lawmakers have filed articles of impeachment against four federal judges who recently ruled against the Trump administration.

“Congress has the constitutional power to impeach rogue activist judges—and we intend to use it,” Republican Rep. Brendan Gill of Texas, who filed articles of impeachment against a federal judge who ordered the Trump administration to turn around planes that were deporting alleged Venezuelan immigrants to a gulag in El Salvador, wrote in a post on X.

House Republicans are pushing for the impeachments to move forward even as Politico reported that some GOP lawmakers view the effort to be “idiotic.”

“You don’t impeach judges who make decisions you disagree with, because that happens all the time,” Republican Sen. John Cornyn of Texas told Politico in early March. “What you do is you appeal, and if you’re right, then you’re going to win on appeal.”

Even Chief Justice John Roberts warned that impeachment is not the way to handle disagreements with judicial decisions.

“We are going to keep the impeachments coming,” Republican Rep. Andy Ogles of Tennessee wrote in a post on X. Ogles himself filed articles of impeachment against a judge who ordered the Trump administration to restore websites it had taken down to comply with Trump's executive order targeting “gender ideology extremism.”

But complicating things for Republican leadership is that Trump blessed the impeachment efforts on Tuesday, saying that the judge who tried to block his effort to deport immigrants without due process is a "Radical Left Lunatic of a Judge, a troublemaker and agitator who was sadly appointed by Barack Hussein Obama."

“This judge, like many of the Crooked Judges’ I am forced to appear before, should be IMPEACHED!!! WE DON’T WANT VICIOUS, VIOLENT, AND DEMENTED CRIMINALS, MANY OF THEM DERANGED MURDERERS, IN OUR COUNTRY. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!!!” Trump wrote in a deranged Truth Social post.

Co-president Elon Musk, who has threatened to fund primary challenges to Republicans who don’t do what Trump says, also wants judicial impeachments.

“This is a judicial coup. We need 60 senators to impeach the judges and restore rule of the people,” Musk wrote in a post on X on Tuesday after another federal judge ruled against the Trump administration, this time on its attempted ban of transgender troops.

Given that GOP leaders acquiesce to all of Trump's wants, no matter how immoral or unconstitutional, his demand puts them in a difficult place of having to choose what’s right or to make their Dear Leader happy.

“Everything is on the table,” Russell Dye, a spokesperson for House Judiciary Chair Jim Jordan, told Politico. An unnamed spokesperson for House Speaker Mike Johnson also told Politico that judges “with political agendas pose a significant threat” and that Johnson "looks forward to working with the Judiciary Committee as they review all available options under the Constitution to address this urgent matter.”

But as aides for Johnson publicly said all options are on the table, top GOP aides privately admitted the impeachment route is stupid and will take up time the House needs to pass the rest of Trump’s destructive and unpopular agenda.

“It’s never going to happen,” an unnamed senior Republican aide told Politico. “There aren’t the votes.”

Plus, forcing Republicans to vote on impeachment could be politically damaging for the GOP.

Polling from February—when Republicans began crowing about impeaching judges who ruled against Trump—showed that voters want Trump to follow court orders.

"This court issue is a big loser for Trump," CNN's Harry Enten wrote in a post on X, referring to a Washington Post poll from February. "The belief that Trump must follow court orders is more popular than Mother Teresa: 84% of all adults, 92% of Dems, 82% of Indies & 79% of the GOP."

Other polls have similar findings, including an NBC News survey released Wednesday. It found that a 43 percent plurality of voters believe the president and executive branch have too much power, as opposed to 28 percent who believe the Supreme Court and judicial branch have too much.

The cherry on top of this for GOP leaders is that their members would be taking potentially damaging votes on impeachment for nothing. The charges would be disposed of in the Senate, where there is no way on earth that two-thirds of the chamber would vote to convict and remove judges. Republicans have just 53 votes there. To impeach a judge, they’d need 14 Democrats to also join in.

But never put it past Republicans to do stupid things in the name of subservience to Trump.

Reprinted with permission from Daily Kos.

Thanks, Chief Justice! How Trump Plans To Defy Court Orders With Impunity

Thanks, Chief Justice! How Trump Plans To Defy Court Orders With Impunity

Easy: He’s going to use John Roberts’ gift of presidential immunity and his power to issue pardons granted by the Constitution.

Friends, we have arrived at a place that I think it's safe to say the founders never contemplated. Donald Trump has crafted for himself a form of absolute rule by twisting the rule of law the founders thought they were writing into the Constitution. The rule of law establishes a set of boundaries outlining what is permissible and what is not for our government. The Constitution sets it up this way: the Congress passes bills; the president signs the bills into law and is sworn to make sure that the laws are faithfully executed; the courts interpret the laws and either uphold or overturn them.

We should have been paying closer attention on the night of January 20th when Trump pardoned the nearly 1,600 insurrectionists who were convicted of committing crimes in his name on January the 6th, 2021. What Trump did with the stroke of a pen amounted to what his so-called border czar, Tom Homan, told Fox News this morning: “We’re not stopping. I don’t care what the judges think. I don’t care what the left thinks. We’re coming.”

He was talking about the administration’s open defiance of a federal judge’s court order on Saturday night that attempted to stop the deportation of more than 200 alleged Venezuelan gang members. Judge James E. Boasberg told the lawyer for the Department of Justice if the alleged gang members were being deported by plane, that the planes should be turned around and the deportees returned to American soil until he could sort out whether Trump's actions under the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 are legal.

In a hearing late this afternoon, the DOJ lawyer refused repeatedly to answer questions from the judge about the deportation flights on Saturday night, saying he wasn't authorized to reveal details because of national security.

The movement of the Venezuelan migrants, whose heads were shaved and were attired in white pajama-like shorts and shirts, was all over Fox News and other conservative outlets almost in real time, and clips of the deportees being loaded onto and taken out of planes were shown repeatedly on television news today. So, the national security claim of the DOJ lawyer was bogus on its face, because the Trump administration made no attempt whatsoever to hide what it was doing or how.

Judge Boasberg gave the DOJ lawyer until noon tomorrow to come up with an answer to one of the judge’s questions that the lawyer refused to respond to today, namely what time on Saturday that the Department of Justice believes the judge’s order went into effect. Establishing that time is necessary for the judge to determine whether the Trump administration defied his order, which would subject anyone involved in the defiance to a contempt citation by the judge.

There was a bunch of back and forth between the judge and the DOJ lawyer this afternoon, with the lawyer asserting that the judge’s order only went into effect when he put it in writing, and not when he issued it orally from the bench earlier.

None of this is ad hoc. Trump clearly set out to defy the order of this judge, and he will defy any others he disagrees with. White House officials have told reporters that they want this case or another one to end up before the Supreme Court, where they think they will win.

It is apparent that Trump plans to take the position that the Supreme Court’s decision on presidential immunity allows him to do anything he wants so long as it is an official presidential act. Trump will contend that anyone acting on his orders is protected by his presidential immunity, and if any court, including the Supreme Court, says otherwise, Trump will pardon anyone who is found to have broken the law or is declared in contempt of court. In an authoritarian state, contempt for the law comes down from the top, and that is exactly where we find ourselves today.

Lucian K. Truscott IV, a graduate of West Point, has had a 50-year career as a journalist, novelist, and screenwriter. He has covered Watergate, the Stonewall riots, and wars in Lebanon, Iraq, and Afghanistan. He is also the author of five bestselling novels. He writes every day at luciantruscott.substack.com and you can follow him on Bluesky @lktiv.bsky.social and on Facebook at Lucian K. Truscott IV. Please consider subscribing to his Substack.

Reprinted with permission from Lucian Truscott Newsletter.



Shop our Store

Headlines

Editor's Blog

Corona Virus

Trending

World