RetroFed Forum
Your home away from modern life.
Supreme Court says Trump global tariffs are illegal
Post Reply
AuthorMessage
RandAlThor lemmy.ca RandAlThor@lemmy.ca
Joined: 2023-06-09
Quote

126   Original
TropicalDingdong lemmy.world TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
Joined: 2023-07-29
#2 · Quote Reply

Oops all damage

13
AreaKode riskeratspizza.com areakode@riskeratspizza.com
Joined: 2026-01-08
#3 · Quote Reply

What form do I need to fill out to get all my fucking money back?!

37
kingofras lemmy.world kingofras@lemmy.world
Joined: 2024-05-13
#4 · Quote Reply

Fuck off Supreme Court. I have it on good authority that The President is immune to any legal action for any presidential acts.

6
diverging piefed.social diverging@piefed.social
Joined: 2025-06-04
#5 · Quote Reply

What form do I need to fill out to get all my fucking money back?!

You won't be getting any money back. While you did ultimately pay since the companies that technically paid just raised their prices, that doesn't matter. You didn't technically pay any taxes, so you have no recourse to get it back. This has all just been a massive gift to companies.

19
CharlesDarwin lemmy.world CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world
Joined: 2023-06-22
#6 · Quote Reply

Did they cite the case of No Shit v. Sherlock?

10
CharlesDarwin lemmy.world CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world
Joined: 2023-06-22
#7 · (edited) Quote Reply

Fuck off Supreme Court. I have it on good authority that The President is immune to any legal action for any presidential acts.

Meanwhile, in countries that seem to take the rule of law and democracy seriously, Yoon got life in prison for what he did. It seems that the death penalty was on the table, though.

Back here, the orange menace just does whatever the fuck he wants and this corrupted court gave him an out for it.

7
orclev lemmy.world orclev@lemmy.world
Joined: 2023-06-12
#8 · Quote Reply

You won't be getting any money back. While you did ultimately pay since the companies that technically paid just raised their prices, that doesn't matter. You didn't technically pay any taxes, so you have no recourse to get it back. This has all just been a massive gift to companies.

That's not necessarily true. Many of us actually paid import tariffs directly. For instance I had to pay ~$300 in order to get a package I ordered to clear customs. Had I not paid it would have been returned to the manufacturer.

18
AreaKode riskeratspizza.com areakode@riskeratspizza.com
Joined: 2026-01-08
#9 · Quote Reply

That's not necessarily true. Many of us actually paid import tariffs directly. For instance I had to pay ~$300 in order to get a package I ordered to clear customs. Had I not paid it would have been returned to the manufacturer.

Yuuup. I enjoy creating custom PCBs. It's way easier to solder a PCB is you use a steel stencil. Learned the hard way that you don't want to import steel right now. $70 directly to DHL on top of what I'd already paid the manufacturer!

7
Eldritch piefed.world Eldritch@piefed.world
Joined: 2025-07-08
#10 · (edited) Quote Reply

Meanwhile, in countries that seem to take the rule of law and democracy seriously, Yoon got life in prison for what he did. It seems that the death penalty was on the table, though. Back here, the orange menace just does whatever the fuck he wants and this corrupted court gave him an out for it.

It's a result of apathy and centralization of power. In the early 20th century there wasn't an all powerful national party organization. Local parties represented local constituents. And people were much more involved locally.

When the national apparatuses became viable and weren't stomped out and eradicated. They stopped representing local constituents and started representing themselves. Locals stopped engaging with the parties because they didn't respond to the needs of the people. Then things just kept devolving till today.

1
thinkercharmercoderfarmer slrpnk.net thinkercharmercoderfarmer@slrpnk.net
Joined: 2025-10-14
#11 · (edited) Quote Reply

Did they cite the case of No Shit v. Sherlock?

Kind of. My reading of the opinion is that it boils down to "the power to regulate doesn't imply the power to tax and never has."

The President asserts the extraordinary power to unilat-
erally impose tariffs of unlimited amount, duration, and
scope. In light of the breadth, history, and constitutional
context of that asserted authority, he must identify clear
congressional authorization to exercise it.
IEEPA’s grant of authority to “regulate . . . importation”
falls short. IEEPA contains no reference to tariffs or duties.
The Government points to no statute in which Congress
used the word “regulate” to authorize taxation. And until
now no President has read IEEPA to confer such power.
We claim no special competence in matters of economics
or foreign affairs. We claim only, as we must, the limited
role assigned to us by Article III of the Constitution. Ful-
filling that role, we hold that IEEPA does not authorize the
President to impose tariffs.

Full opinion: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/24-1287_4gcj.pdf

2
Post Reply
Back to top