System maintenance completed. Please clear your browser cache and log in again.

Post history

View previous revisions and diffs for this post.
Hide history
Edited 15d ago by unionstrong
@boxox said ↗But Trump's plan A to tariff the whole world was just struck down by the Supreme Court. It was probably plan A in the first place because it had the highest perceived chance of success.Are plans B and later just to keep going by invoking authority under other statutes that are even more likely to be struck down? That method of operation wouldn't be likely to help the economy. Businesses wouldn't go for it.What choice are they gonna have? If it can be done by legal statutes, it’s going to be done. Another reconciliation bill could also give him cover to impose tariffs.
Rendered before/after
Before


But Trump's plan A to tariff the whole world was just struck down by the Supreme Court. It was probably plan A in the first place because it had the highest perceived chance of success.

Are plans B and later just to keep going by invoking authority under other statutes that are even more likely to be struck down? That method of operation wouldn't be likely to help the economy. Businesses wouldn't go for it.


What choice are they gonna have? If it can be done by legal statutes, it’s going to be done.

After


But Trump's plan A to tariff the whole world was just struck down by the Supreme Court. It was probably plan A in the first place because it had the highest perceived chance of success.

Are plans B and later just to keep going by invoking authority under other statutes that are even more likely to be struck down? That method of operation wouldn't be likely to help the economy. Businesses wouldn't go for it.


What choice are they gonna have? If it can be done by legal statutes, it’s going to be done. Another reconciliation bill could also give him cover to impose tariffs.