The U.S. Supreme Court held a hearing on November 5th local time as planned, initiating the trial regarding litigation related to Trump's tariff policies.

This case was also described by Trump himself as a "critical moment for the survival of the United States."

But Trump probably didn't expect that someone from his own side would not stand on his side, and even raised the "sword of doubt" against his tariff policy.

It should be noted that Trump launched a "tariff war" against the entire world in the first half of the year.

However, the U.S. Constitution has clear provisions, stating that only Congress has the power to levy taxes.

For this reason, the U.S. Federal Circuit Court of Appeals and the Court of International Trade ruled that Trump's tariff policy is "unlawful."

Naturally, the Trump administration will not give up easily, and it has appealed all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, which led to this hearing.

And Trump's persistence is not only because tariffs are his "extortion" leverage against the world.

Also, if he loses the case, the U.S. Treasury is likely to have to refund at least $75 billion, according to the estimate of the U.S. Treasury Secretary.

In fact, Trump issued a warning the day before the hearing.

He claimed that if the ruling is unfavorable, the U.S. economy may face "catastrophic consequences," showing how important this matter is to him.

But the direction of this hearing probably surprised Trump.

Of the nine U.S. Supreme Court Justices, six are conservatives, which gives Trump some advantage in this regard.

However, three of these conservative judges did not fully "side with" Trump.

According to a report from Lianzao News, including Chief Justice Roberts, although not personally nominated by Trump, he has supported Trump on multiple conservative issues.

But in this hearing, he directly pointed out that Trump's tariff policy essentially means taxing Americans.

And emphasized that this has always been the power of Congress.

This statement also opened the first crack.

Indeed, no matter how "glamorous" Trump packages it, the ones who ultimately pay for his tariff policy are American importers and ordinary consumers.

And the U.S. Constitution has clearly defined that the power to levy taxes belongs to Congress, and is certainly not a power that the president can exercise arbitrarily.

It is estimated that this also made Trump "angry," as two other judges he personally nominated, Gorsuch and Barrett, could be considered his allies.

They did not fully stand on his side either, and raised questions about his tariff policy.

However, they may not be targeting Trump personally, but rather safeguarding the constitutional boundaries of power.

After all, if the president is allowed to bypass Congress to levy taxes, even if the current conservative government benefits from it,

in the future, it might leave a "precedent for overstepping" for the liberals, which would be a long-term harm to the American system.

But this "system priority over party" stance is one of the unexpected aspects of this hearing.

Although the hearing has now ended, the ruling is expected to come out by the end of the year, and it is unknown whether it will be delayed further.

According to reports, the U.S. Supreme Court has three possible options:

First, rule that Trump's tariff policy is "illegal," requiring the Trump administration to refund and cancel the policy;

Second, adopt a compromise solution, allowing Trump to impose taxes under specific conditions, setting certain boundaries;

Third, support Trump's tariff policy, but according to the current attitude of the justices, this possibility is estimated to be low.

However, even if Trump loses the case, he may cite other laws to maintain part of the tariffs, but the process may become more complicated, and the strength will be greatly reduced.

Regardless of the outcome, this may send a signal of rational return for global trade and the U.S. domestic economy.

Original article: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7569516255602917922/

Statement: This article represents the views of the author, and you are welcome to express your opinion by clicking on the 【top/down】 buttons below.