Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

lostincalifornia

(5,203 posts)
Mon Feb 23, 2026, 07:56 AM 4 hrs ago

The Supreme Court's Tariff Ruling Doesn't Solve the Problem

On the merits, the Supreme Court’s decision last week to invalidate much of the president’s global tariff regime is to be welcomed. Yet the court’s judgment, sound as it might be on constitutional grounds, can’t by itself undo the damage that America’s turn to protectionism has already caused — nor prevent worse to come.

Avoiding further harm will be entirely up to the administration and Congress. Unless they choose to put stability first, things could quickly spiral toward a crisis.

By a 6-3 margin, the court found that the president had exceeded his authority when imposing a blizzard of high tariffs last year. It ruled that the law the administration had invoked, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, didn’t explicitly authorize such measures when conferring the power to “regulate” trade. Other crucial questions were left unresolved, however, not least whether the White House can replace the tariffs using other legal tools or if it can keep on declaring so-called emergencies to justify expansive executive action.

Plans to replace the duties are already underway. In response to the ruling, the president said that he’ll impose a new global 15% tariff under Section 122 of the 1974 Trade Act and start investigations with a view to imposing more levies using different authorities. This leaves the outlook no clearer than before. In particular, firms that have paid the now-illegal tariffs will seek redress. Whether refunds will be granted and how they’d be administered has been sent back to lower courts — with some $170 billion of government revenue at stake.



https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2026-02-23/supreme-court-s-tariff-ruling-doesn-t-reverse-economic-damage?srnd=homepage-americas

The real question is WHY DIDN'T the Supreme Court rule on this earlier? The same thing pertains to the challenges by this administration on birth right citizenship, WHY ISN'T THE SUPREME COURT RULING ON THAT ISSUE earlier, or issues THAT BY ALL APPEARANCES SEEM ENCODED IN THE CONSTITUTION?

What is even more troubling is THIS supreme court shouldn't even accept some of these cases that are obviously against the Constitution and that the lower courts reinforced.



3 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
The Supreme Court's Tariff Ruling Doesn't Solve the Problem (Original Post) lostincalifornia 4 hrs ago OP
Why didn't they temporarily halt the tariffs pending deciding the case Raven123 3 hrs ago #1
+++ lostincalifornia 3 hrs ago #2
I agreed... appmanga 3 hrs ago #3

Raven123

(7,713 posts)
1. Why didn't they temporarily halt the tariffs pending deciding the case
Mon Feb 23, 2026, 08:32 AM
3 hrs ago

The handwringing over refunds was foreseeable. They knew it. We knew it. They didn’t want to interfere with Trump. Instead he just escalated his insanity on economic and other fronts. Now they decide he’s acting unconstitutionally. Duh.

appmanga

(1,446 posts)
3. I agreed...
Mon Feb 23, 2026, 08:58 AM
3 hrs ago

...the Court defers to Trump, stating that he will suffer the irreparable harm if he's enjoined, but the people who've been illegal fired or those who received assistance or grants from government programs will somehow be alright until a case can be decided on the merits. This Court has been an ass-backwards enabler of the authoritarian regime. Justices are supposed to be impartial; they're not required to blindly exist in a vacuum. This is a Court that feels it must stick a finger into every pie, something so-called conservative justices used to deride. Now that the dogs have been called on them, I wonder if they'll see the light? I doubt it.

Latest Discussions»Editorials & Other Articles»The Supreme Court's Tarif...