this post was submitted on 21 Feb 2026
78 points (100.0% liked)

politics

28460 readers
1931 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Trump just said Fuck You to the supreme court decision and to Congress. He signed an order saying he will enact 10%tariffs and can ignore congress.

Who has the power to arrest him for contempt of court?

top 9 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works 38 points 1 day ago* (last edited 16 hours ago)

That's not exactly what's happening here. He hasn't refused to follow the supreme court ruling. Instead he's claiming that other laws grant him the authority to impose tariffs.

In some respects he's right. There is a law that very explicitly grants the president the authority to impose tariffs, but only up to 15%, and only for 150 days. It's this law that he'll be using to impose this new 10% global tariff.

He'll likely also be trying to find any kind of legal wiggle room to maintain the existing tariffs, but I doubt he'll get very far with that. At best he might be able to impose a bunch of sector specific tariffs.

Edit to add: I'll note for the sake of completeness that Trump has claimed that the existing tariffs will remain in place. But again, his claim is not that the court has no authority over him, just that there are other legal mechanisms that still give him that power. I suspect that this is just Trump mouthing off. But either way, he's being very careful not to actually defy the court's authority here, and that's a distinction that matters.

[–] altphoto@lemmy.today 10 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

Why do they take a photo of him mid shart like that?

[–] RizzRustbolt@lemmy.world 10 points 21 hours ago

Waiting for him to not be mid shart takes too long.

[–] tonytins@pawb.social 23 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Who has the power to arrest him for contempt of court?

While we're on the subject, at what point will SCOTUS get fed up with him?

[–] HuntressHimbo@lemmy.zip 10 points 21 hours ago

at what point will SCOTUS get fed up with him?

At the rate they're going they are on track for several years after he has ordered their executions

[–] Hegar@fedia.io 16 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

This misunderstands the situation.

Most of the conservative majority on the court are active participants in the ongoing fascist coup, probably a few are just committed sympathizers.

This isn't the supreme court enforcing the law against the president, this is a disagreement between factions within the regime about the priorities and direction.

[–] tonytins@pawb.social 2 points 20 hours ago

this is a disagreement between factions within the regime about the priorities and direction.

They've been infighting since Trump returned to power. So is there that.

[–] BlameThePeacock@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 day ago

When he no longer helps their cause (or pocket books)

[–] minorkeys@lemmy.world 3 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago)

The way it may work is he does something illegal and someone has to challenge him in court, then the court decides. Then he does it again and the same process has to occur. It takes months each time, effectively enabling him to continue tariffs indefinitely.