When will there be a ruling on the Tariff lawsuits?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Stock market should be up tomorrow.


It was down this evening because markets don't like it when they don't know who is in charge. And this ruling constitutes a HUGE blow to Trump himself, who ran on and pushed for tariffs personally. Evidently this case will go to the Supreme Court, and I'm sure some tariffs will end up sticking.

So be careful trading, PP. It's going to zig-zag some more.

Stock market futures are jumping up. Sure there could be zig zagging as there always is, but as for tomorrow it will be up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Stock market should be up tomorrow.

It was down this evening because markets don't like it when they don't know who is in charge. And this ruling constitutes a HUGE blow to Trump himself, who ran on and pushed for tariffs personally. Evidently this case will go to the Supreme Court, and I'm sure some tariffs will end up sticking.

So be careful trading, PP. It's going to zig-zag some more.

Best argument for Roberts to rule against Trump on this is the "don't mess with my 401k" precedent that was just set when they said he could fire anyone except at the Fed. Clearly that's the new law of the land, so Johnny "Balls and Strikes" will say no to tariffs.

[Anonymous]

There must be a lot of Republicans breathing a quiet sigh of relief.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Stock market should be up tomorrow.


It was down this evening because markets don't like it when they don't know who is in charge. And this ruling constitutes a HUGE blow to Trump himself, who ran on and pushed for tariffs personally. Evidently this case will go to the Supreme Court, and I'm sure some tariffs will end up sticking.

So be careful trading, PP. It's going to zig-zag some more.

Stock market futures are jumping up. Sure there could be zig zagging as there always is, but as for tomorrow it will be up.

Not by as much as expected. Dow futures WERE up about 500 as of midnight, but around 3 am they started falling and now they are up only about 200. There's your zig zag.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Stock market should be up tomorrow.


It was down this evening because markets don't like it when they don't know who is in charge. And this ruling constitutes a HUGE blow to Trump himself, who ran on and pushed for tariffs personally. Evidently this case will go to the Supreme Court, and I'm sure some tariffs will end up sticking.

So be careful trading, PP. It's going to zig-zag some more.

Stock market futures are jumping up. Sure there could be zig zagging as there always is, but as for tomorrow it will be up.

Not by as much as expected. Dow futures WERE up about 500 as of midnight, but around 3 am they started falling and now they are up only about 200. There's your zig zag.

Trump had already caved on a good portion of these illegal tariffs over the last few weeks so the market had already recovered a good amount.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Stock market should be up tomorrow.

It was down this evening because markets don't like it when they don't know who is in charge. And this ruling constitutes a HUGE blow to Trump himself, who ran on and pushed for tariffs personally. Evidently this case will go to the Supreme Court, and I'm sure some tariffs will end up sticking.

So be careful trading, PP. It's going to zig-zag some more.

I don't know why anyone thinks a conservative supreme court (well, 3 conservatives and 2 that have become right wing nut jobs) will support tariffs.

My guess is that the Supreme Court will uphold this ruling likely 7-2. It's not even a difficult decision.

The tariffs implemented under other provisions which have to be implemented by industry/product are the ones that may stick. Those are very difficult to implement because you have to go through all the industry codes and apply them one-by-one since they don't apply to 100% of those products. Hence, the steel and aluminum tariffs will remain...but again, there are all kinds of exemptions to those.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Stock market should be up tomorrow.

It was down this evening because markets don't like it when they don't know who is in charge. And this ruling constitutes a HUGE blow to Trump himself, who ran on and pushed for tariffs personally. Evidently this case will go to the Supreme Court, and I'm sure some tariffs will end up sticking.

So be careful trading, PP. It's going to zig-zag some more.

I don't know why anyone thinks a conservative supreme court (well, 3 conservatives and 2 that have become right wing nut jobs) will support tariffs.

My guess is that the Supreme Court will uphold this ruling likely 7-2. It's not even a difficult decision.

The tariffs implemented under other provisions which have to be implemented by industry/product are the ones that may stick. Those are very difficult to implement because you have to go through all the industry codes and apply them one-by-one since they don't apply to 100% of those products. Hence, the steel and aluminum tariffs will remain...but again, there are all kinds of exemptions to those.

Wish I agreed with you, but after the presidential immunity ruling, any concept of Roberts linkage to precedent/ideology/etc is not supported by the evidence anymore. They just ruled the president has the authority to fire heads of agencies without cause, where the enabling legislation specifically said "the president can't fire the agency head except for cause".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Stock market should be up tomorrow.


It was down this evening because markets don't like it when they don't know who is in charge. And this ruling constitutes a HUGE blow to Trump himself, who ran on and pushed for tariffs personally. Evidently this case will go to the Supreme Court, and I'm sure some tariffs will end up sticking.

So be careful trading, PP. It's going to zig-zag some more.

Stock market futures are jumping up. Sure there could be zig zagging as there always is, but as for tomorrow it will be up.

Not by as much as expected. Dow futures WERE up about 500 as of midnight, but around 3 am they started falling and now they are up only about 200. There's your zig zag.

Trump had already caved on a good portion of these illegal tariffs over the last few weeks so the market had already recovered a good amount.

Not really. There were still 10% tariffs on every country, 30% on China, and I forget what different number in Canada and Mexico.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Stock market should be up tomorrow.

It was down this evening because markets don't like it when they don't know who is in charge. And this ruling constitutes a HUGE blow to Trump himself, who ran on and pushed for tariffs personally. Evidently this case will go to the Supreme Court, and I'm sure some tariffs will end up sticking.

So be careful trading, PP. It's going to zig-zag some more.

I don't know why anyone thinks a conservative supreme court (well, 3 conservatives and 2 that have become right wing nut jobs) will support tariffs.

My guess is that the Supreme Court will uphold this ruling likely 7-2. It's not even a difficult decision.

The tariffs implemented under other provisions which have to be implemented by industry/product are the ones that may stick. Those are very difficult to implement because you have to go through all the industry codes and apply them one-by-one since they don't apply to 100% of those products. Hence, the steel and aluminum tariffs will remain...but again, there are all kinds of exemptions to those.

Wish I agreed with you, but after the presidential immunity ruling, any concept of Roberts linkage to precedent/ideology/etc is not supported by the evidence anymore. They just ruled the president has the authority to fire heads of agencies without cause, where the enabling legislation specifically said "the president can't fire the agency head except for cause".

I can't remember some of the exact cases, but the justices tend to be truly conservative on fiscal issues.

Also, Trump himself really has screwed up the case. You can't claim you need 145% tariffs on China one week...and then just drop them the next, yet literally China didn't do anything.

Also, it was a huge mistake to blame trade deficits for anything. As everyone has pointed out...trade deficits have existed for eternity, yet the country is doing just fine. Also, it's unrealistic to think that Nicaragua which grows tons of bananas that can't be grown in the US, is not going to have a trade deficit with the US.

Even the entire concept of a trade deficit isn't correct (as plaintiffs have pointed out)...you have to look at goods and services, and when you include services, we run a surplus with essentially everyone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Stock market should be up tomorrow.

It was down this evening because markets don't like it when they don't know who is in charge. And this ruling constitutes a HUGE blow to Trump himself, who ran on and pushed for tariffs personally. Evidently this case will go to the Supreme Court, and I'm sure some tariffs will end up sticking.

So be careful trading, PP. It's going to zig-zag some more.

I don't know why anyone thinks a conservative supreme court (well, 3 conservatives and 2 that have become right wing nut jobs) will support tariffs.

My guess is that the Supreme Court will uphold this ruling likely 7-2. It's not even a difficult decision.

The tariffs implemented under other provisions which have to be implemented by industry/product are the ones that may stick. Those are very difficult to implement because you have to go through all the industry codes and apply them one-by-one since they don't apply to 100% of those products. Hence, the steel and aluminum tariffs will remain...but again, there are all kinds of exemptions to those.

Wish I agreed with you, but after the presidential immunity ruling, any concept of Roberts linkage to precedent/ideology/etc is not supported by the evidence anymore. They just ruled the president has the authority to fire heads of agencies without cause, where the enabling legislation specifically said "the president can't fire the agency head except for cause".

I can't remember some of the exact cases, but the justices tend to be truly conservative on fiscal issues.

Also, Trump himself really has screwed up the case. You can't claim you need 145% tariffs on China one week...and then just drop them the next, yet literally China didn't do anything.

Also, it was a huge mistake to blame trade deficits for anything. As everyone has pointed out...trade deficits have existed for eternity, yet the country is doing just fine. Also, it's unrealistic to think that Nicaragua which grows tons of bananas that can't be grown in the US, is not going to have a trade deficit with the US.

Even the entire concept of a trade deficit isn't correct (as plaintiffs have pointed out)...you have to look at goods and services, and when you include services, we run a surplus with essentially everyone.

I think your views are logical and correct. But we aren't dealing with logical people here in any way, so you can't make predictions based on logic. Wish we could!

[Anonymous]

Appeals court just stayed the injunction. Tariffs are back.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Appeals court just stayed the injunction. Tariffs are back.

Only until June 9 when they’ll decide whether to grant a stay pending appeal

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Appeals court just stayed the injunction. Tariffs are back.

Only until June 9 when they’ll decide whether to grant a stay pending appeal

Snip snap snip snap! Taking quite the toll.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Appeals court just stayed the injunction. Tariffs are back.

Only until June 9 when they’ll decide whether to grant a stay pending appeal

Snip snap snip snap! Taking quite the toll.

Oh come on, this is a perfectly stable economic environment to invest $500 million in a brand new domestic manufacturing facility.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Stock market should be up tomorrow.

It was down this evening because markets don't like it when they don't know who is in charge. And this ruling constitutes a HUGE blow to Trump himself, who ran on and pushed for tariffs personally. Evidently this case will go to the Supreme Court, and I'm sure some tariffs will end up sticking.

So be careful trading, PP. It's going to zig-zag some more.

I don't know why anyone thinks a conservative supreme court (well, 3 conservatives and 2 that have become right wing nut jobs) will support tariffs.

My guess is that the Supreme Court will uphold this ruling likely 7-2. It's not even a difficult decision.

The tariffs implemented under other provisions which have to be implemented by industry/product are the ones that may stick. Those are very difficult to implement because you have to go through all the industry codes and apply them one-by-one since they don't apply to 100% of those products. Hence, the steel and aluminum tariffs will remain...but again, there are all kinds of exemptions to those.

Wish I agreed with you, but after the presidential immunity ruling, any concept of Roberts linkage to precedent/ideology/etc is not supported by the evidence anymore. They just ruled the president has the authority to fire heads of agencies without cause, where the enabling legislation specifically said "the president can't fire the agency head except for cause".

I can't remember some of the exact cases, but the justices tend to be truly conservative on fiscal issues.

Also, Trump himself really has screwed up the case. You can't claim you need 145% tariffs on China one week...and then just drop them the next, yet literally China didn't do anything.

Also, it was a huge mistake to blame trade deficits for anything. As everyone has pointed out...trade deficits have existed for eternity, yet the country is doing just fine. Also, it's unrealistic to think that Nicaragua which grows tons of bananas that can't be grown in the US, is not going to have a trade deficit with the US.

Even the entire concept of a trade deficit isn't correct (as plaintiffs have pointed out)...you have to look at goods and services, and when you include services, we run a surplus with essentially everyone.

That is how conservatives would analyze this case but SCOTUS isn't conservative, they are MAGA.