Here’s a gift link to the live update commentary at the New York Times. It was a six-three decision; the dissenters were Thomas, Alito. and Kavanaugh. Roberts wrote the majority opinion.
As I understand it, Roberts wrote that a president cannot use the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA, to override Congress’s tariff powers in the Constitution. This leaves open the possibility that Trump will use some other contorted legal mechanism to set tariffs, but we don’t yet know what that is or why the SCOTUS wouldn’t strike that down also. The Constitution is crystal clear that the authority to set tariffs belongs only to Congress. And, of course, Trump could just ask Congress to rubber stamp his tariff policies. No guarantees that would work, of course.
Update: This was written and published before the decision. The Wall Street Journal will let you read it if you open a “free” account, so it’s not behind a paywall. In brief, Trump has been throwing a fit over a Federal Reserve report that says 90 percent of the income from the tariffs is being paid by U.S. consumers.
The Fed analysis aligns with other research into the distribution of tariff costs from Harvard economists and Germany’s Kiel Institute—and with common sense. There isn’t widespread evidence that foreign producers are cutting their prices to offset the tariffs, the main mechanism by which foreigners would “pay” for the border taxes.
Nor is the dollar strengthening, which is the other possible mechanism for making foreigners pay (we’ll spare you the equations). Instead the tariffs are causing an increase in post-tariff prices of those goods that are still imported, alongside a modest decrease in the volume of imports. Americans pay higher prices, or “pay” in the form of less choice. …
… So far the manufacturing boom Mr. Trump promised hasn’t appeared, as manufacturing jobs are down over the last year. The New York Fed and other research on cost distribution shows one reason why: To the extent American companies eat some of the costs of tariffs, that’s less cash available for investment and hiring.
If we’re assuming the Wall Street Journal editorial board speaks for the monied class, I’d say that the monied class decided to pull the plug on the tariffs before things got any worse.
See also Layla Jones at TPM.
Update: Trump is currently throwing a temper tantrum on national television. He isn’t making sense, as usual.
From the New York Times:
As Trump says he will impose tariffs under Section 122, the question is how long they will last. The law allows the president to impose those tariffs for 150 days, after which they would need Congressional approval. That will be an uphill battle with midterm elections approaching and more concerns among voters about tariffs adding to the costs of goods.
If he can’t get Congressional approval, the president could turn to other authorities after 150 days. But that would mean yet more uncertainty and unpredictability for businesses that have been whipsawed by this tariff policy.
Update: Paul Krugman on today’s ruling.
Josh Marshall, Don’t Be Fooled By the Corrupt Court’s Tariff Decision
Rogé Karma, Get Ready for Zombie Tariffs at The Atlantic
Update: Kate Santaliz reports for Axios that some House members are pushing for a reconciliation bill that codifies the tariffs that were struck down today. However, it doesn’t sound as if there are enough votes to pass it. A handful of Republicans welcomed the Court’s decision.
The TV bobbleheads are saying that Trump's insistence on sole tariff powers is all about him demanding bribes and gifts and tributes from foreign companies and big corporations. Not all of this is under the table. The donations to build his stupid ballroom would qualify, as is the money he's soliciting to rebuild Gaza. This is money that is going directly to Trump. He seems to be building a slush fund from several sources that Congress can't touch. His tariff threats give him power. A lot of his sources probably figure it's cheaper to give something to Trump than to be punished by tariffs.
Trump says the US is committing $10 billion to his "Peace Board." No one from Congress has started to appropriate money for a non-agency that has zero accountability to Congress. "Slush Fund" is exactly the right term – it's the same thing Nixon had, but Nixon played in the million-dollar range while Trump is scamming in the Billions.
Reading over the experts, h/t to Krugman and Josh Marshall, Trump will not gve up on tariffs. (I concur.) Trump will wind up in court, and next time, the USSC may not give Trump a stay to continue to charge tariffs while litigation winds its way through the courts.
I forget which esteemed writer pointed out that the billionaire who cracks the whip on the Federalist Society was behind the suits that the USSC finally ruled on. What Trump is doing seriously hurts trade in every direction. Free Trade is a GOP cornerstone. Even if it was legal, this court would find the tariffs, as Trump is applying them, to be an obscenity. The ONLY reason this is continuing is that it feeds the mad king's ego and fattens his wallet.
I've been yowling here for a while that the "Conservatives" on the SC are all Federalist Society hacks, not Trumpist stooges. On the Tariffs case, I'm surprised that 3 of them sided with Trump! I suppose the Federalist Society still has to appease Trump, because he may well get to nominate another SC Judge?
OTOH, I won't claim to be highly 'esteemed' here (too many heterodox opinions; I often disrupt the Group Therapy aspect of Mahablog).
The petulant child had three members so well compromised. it seems, that the decision was not unanimous.
Why else?
Article I, Section 8, explicitly grants Congress the power to "lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises," making it the primary authority for setting tariffs.
A commenter to Maureen Dowd's NYT opinion piece identified as 617to416 wrote in part:
Plausible, but let's go with the simple explanation until proven innocent, as the court of public opinion does not need to assume innocence. We are well aware thumbs have been on the scales.
I think what 617to416 wrote is spot on. The "conservative" justices are less about loyalty to Trump — riffraff from Queens — or even the Republican Party than about their grand vision of what the Republic should be according to the Federalist society.
Is it possible that both explanations have a level of truth to them?
They no doubt do favor Republicans, but I suspect Trump is someone they make nice to out of expediency.
Lost in the news this week is 45's directive to the Pentagon to release everything it has on UFOs and ETs. Of course it's all about creating a distraction from Epstein.
Living in Las Vegas for the last few years has opened me to the reality that Vegas is UFO Central. Area 51, a "secret" military base is a few hours north.
The Nevada desert is a vast military playground, where everything, from atomic bomb tests to chemical warfare to training pilots in near perfect aerial conditions occurs. Experimental aircraft are tested (and crashed and recovered) here.
Recovered UFOs are also flown and studied here. It's a bit over the top in cinematic technique, but I recommend the movie: Bob Lazar, Area 51 and Flying Saucers.
A well regarded local TV journalist, George Knapp broke the story 35 years ago, about Bob Lazar, a physicist who feared for his life. Lazar was tasked with understanding and trying to reverse engineer the propulsion systems of recovered alien spacecraft. Their technology is several centuries ahead of ours.
Lazar is a controversial figure, the government tried to erase his past, but things he said 35 years ago turned out to be true, and his story has never deviated. As a dogged investigative journalist, Knapp was able to dig into Lazar's past and find things the government missed, that corroborate his story.
All of this is to say: those of us who believe in ETs and UFOs have been anticipating "full disclosure" – the day the government comes clean about what it knows. When this happens, and humankind realizes that we're not alone on this planet, much less the universe – it will up end all belief systems on this planet. It will be the most significant event in human history, since we settled in cities.
"Full disclosure" has been happening slowly. The government, for decades since WW2 denied their existence, crafting improbable explanations for phenomena reported by civilians. That changed recently, with the government acknowledging UFOs appearing in videos recorded by Navy pilots, for example. Aviators are now encouraged to come forward with what they know.
There is evidence that ETs are able to stop missiles from launching or destroy them after launch. Ever since humans exploded atomic bombs in WW2, ETs have been much more involved in monitoring the human race. It's important to them to not destroy the earth – a rare laboratory in all the universe.
Anyway, two kinds of truth may be emerging in 2026 – the darkest scandal in centuries, involving the rich and powerful of many nations – and the connection between humans and ETs. Thanks to President Chaos.
I never gave UFOs much thought until this year.
As I understand it, Trump is now saying he's putting a 15 % tariff on all imports from everywhere. It's not clear to me if there are any exceptions. The catch is that under existing statutes Trump's tariffs are only good for 150 days, after which they must be approved by Congress or they will be suspended. And that would be in late July. That's at a point at which everyone in the House and about a third of the Senate is focused on midterm election campaigns. But the tariffs have been underwater in approval polls for several months, and it might be dangerous for a campaigning incumbent to vote for them.
The miscreant child continues to pound the square peg into the round hole. We may just have to admit to the fact that he is never going to grow out of it.
He was the same way as a "businessman," which is why he had to declare bankruptcy so many times. He doesn't know how to admit mistakes and change course. He just doubles down.
Edit looked good, yet it went back to the unedited mess for some unknown reason.