this post was submitted on 01 May 2026
119 points (100.0% liked)

World News

2084 readers
796 users here now

Rules:
Be a decent person.
No racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, zionism/nazism, and so on.

Other Great Communities:

Rules

Be excellent to each other

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from : https://lemmy.zip/post/63568513

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] st3ph3n@midwest.social 55 points 1 day ago (9 children)

Did he forget about that lawsuit he lost where his tariffs were determined to be illegal?

Who am I kidding? He doesn't give a shit.

[–] samsamsamsam@discuss.online 20 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Supreme Court ruling was against tariffs under IEEPA. He is still able to use industry specific tariffs under Trade Expansion Act, that's how tariffs on Canadian auto, lumber, steel, aluminum sectors continue dispute Supreme Court ruling

[–] renzhexiangjiao@piefed.blahaj.zone 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

is it then not possible for him to circumvent the ruling entirely by simply taxing the industries that account for like 99% of the trade with a given country? like it probably wouldn't be possible to list all the industries but surely listing 10 most popular ones would essentially equate to a blanket tariff

[–] samsamsamsam@discuss.online 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Not quite. The industry specific tariffs are not a free workaround for blanket tariffs. Each sector tariff needs its own legal basis, investigation and justification, often tied to national security or trade remedy rules. If the government just picked the top industries to recreate a country wide tariff, courts could treat that as pretext or abuse of authority. So “10 big industries = basically blanket tariff” may be economically similar but legally it is not the same thing

load more comments (6 replies)