Supreme Court won't hear tariff challenge, paving way for new Trump action
Source: USA Today
WASHINGTON The Supreme Court on June 15 declined to hear from businesses challenging President Donald Trump's tariffs on China, which he imposed in 2018 under a different law than the emergency duties the high court struck down in February.
The justices' decision not to review a ruling upholding those tariffs could embolden the administration as it seeks to replace many of the emergency tariffs Trump tried to impose last year.
And it leaves in place import fees that companies opposed to the tariffs said are costing American consumers nearly $75 billion a year.
At issue were some of the tariffs imposed during the first Trump administration on imports from China under the 1974 Trade Act, which allows the United States to take action against another country's unfair trade practices.
Read more: https://www.yahoo.com/news/politics/articles/supreme-court-wont-hear-tariff-133326197.html
Did someone buy Thomas a new RV?
wcmagumba
(6,813 posts)onenote
(46,322 posts)It's easy to knee jerk react to every decision as somehow the result of Thomas being bribed. But the background on this case undercuts that argument. It would only take four justices agreeing to hear the case to grant cert. Not only were there not four such votes, none of the Democrats on the Court noted that they would grant the petition. Moreover, the decision below was a unanimous ruling by a three court panel made up of a GHWBush appointed judge and two Obama appointed judges. And before that, there was another three judge panel, all Obama appointees, that ruled in favor of the tariffs.
GenThePerservering
(3,965 posts)you and a few others with your intelligent understanding cut through the general hysteria.
pat_k
(14,346 posts)onenote
(46,322 posts)What corrupt idiots they must be.
Sarcasm of course.
See post #2
pat_k
(14,346 posts)eppur_se_muova
(42,830 posts)Quanto Magnus
(1,406 posts)is over 5 years old, so it's clearly time to replace it.
Then he can double dip, by selling the 'old' RV for more than market value to someone who has business with the court. Win win!!
paleotn
(22,986 posts)Donnie's dead or gone by 2029 and then it's back to business as usual. Long term supply chain and other economic concerns may drive some reshoring. Not the ravings of a senile old man. Simply put, we can have cheap or we can have onshore. We cannot have both. That math don't math.