Just after talking with China, Trump received bad news. The Supreme Court collectively "disagreed," and he is about to lose the case. Now Trump is in a panic. Not only will he have to return the money, but he will also be unable to keep his presidential position.

Visitors entering the Supreme Court

Recently, the U.S. Supreme Court held a debate on whether Trump's global tariffs are legal. However, it was rare that conservative justices and liberal justices crossed their "ideological camps" and stood together, all raising doubts about the legality of Trump's tariff policy.

Foreign media stated that given multiple justices raised doubts, Trump is very likely to lose the case. The core issue of this debate is whether the President has the power to impose tariffs unilaterally, because the U.S. Constitution clearly states that the power to tax belongs to Congress, not the President. Moreover, one justice pointed out directly that these tariffs are actually taxing Americans.

However, the Trump administration argued that Trump's actions did not violate the law. They cited a 50-year-old law called the International Emergency Economic Powers Act as the legal basis for imposing tariffs. This act stipulates that the President can take specific measures to deal with threats under a national emergency.

Trump

However, conservative justices believe that although this law allows the President to "regulate imports", it does not include "tariff power". There is no such wording in the legal text, nor is there any historical meaning like that. The original intention of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act was precisely to limit the President's power, not to expand it.

Additionally, if Trump's actions are recognized, does that mean that Congress could hand over all the responsibility of regulating foreign trade to the President? That is obviously unreasonable. Moreover, how can we prove that the taxed countries threaten American security? Even if there are one or two countries that do so, should we tax all countries around the world?

Demonstrators outside the Supreme Court protesting Trump's tariff policy

Currently, the Supreme Court is 6 to 3 in favor of conservatives, but from the hearing, at least five justices do not want the president's power to expand indefinitely. Seeing that he is at a disadvantage, Trump became furious. In an interview, he said that this is a "life-or-death moment" for America, and if he loses the case, America will face a "devastating" disaster, and everything he did was for the country.

Trump even mentioned China to prove that his actions were correct. He distorted the facts by saying that because China limited the export of rare earths to the United States, the United States decided to impose a 100% tariff on China. But this move worked well, and soon China and the United States had a phone call and met, achieving significant results. Trump used this example to illustrate that "the tariff stick" can really "protect America."

U.S. Treasury Secretary attending the debate

The meeting between the U.S. and China was once a diplomatic achievement that Trump was proud of, but even Trump himself probably didn't expect that just after the talks, he would face a defeat. Worse still, if Trump loses the case, the U.S. government may need to refund $130 billion to $140 billion in taxes to U.S. companies, which would involve more complex issues.

Trump's tariff policy not only affects domestic U.S. but also affects the nerves of global trade. Analysts believe that if Trump's tariff measures are ruled invalid due to exceeding authority, existing trade agreements may need to be reassessed. However, U.S. Treasury Secretary Bensons has already stated that even if they lose the case, the Trump administration will use other means to maintain the tariffs.

For U.S. companies, regardless of the Supreme Court's decision, they have already paid a heavy price for Trump's tariff policy. The Supreme Court's decision may be announced by the end of the year, and its impact goes beyond the legal realm. It is not only about the political agenda of the Trump administration, but it will also redefine the boundaries of the separation of powers in the United States.

Original: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7569530135192420864/

Statement: This article represents the views of the author. Please express your opinion by voting up or down below.