REUTERS / Carlos Barria / Jonathan Ernst
(Washington, DC) – President Trump made it a major focus of his second term in office. He had waded into a potential, protracted trade war during his first term, but largely avoided it. This time, he wasn’t going to let the opportunity pass. Going back to the 1980s, when Trump was merely a business titan in New York City’s real estate scene, he railed against unfair trade practices.
Back then it was largely Japan and its burgeoning electronics industry taking advantage of American consumers. Now, it’s chiefly China and a series of other nations that rely on manufacturing and consumer goods to advance their economies. Said differently, America is the world’s consumer class — and we drive production in developing nations. Our demand is what allows the world at large to increasingly leave poverty, raise its standard of living, and provide jobs.
President Trump also realizes that America’s financial independence, the strength of the US dollar, and protecting domestic industry is paramount to keeping the nation strong. During COVID we saw the downside of relying on foreign factories and the global supply chain. If we are to be truly safe and prosperous we can’t just bank on “profit margins” the reason America is secure.
To that end, President Trump’s sweeping tariffs caused fear and apprehension among many. The “panicans” are Trump called them, or others might call them “chicken little,” believed the sky would fall if levies were placed on the import of foreign goods. Yet a curious thing happened in the spring of 2025. Despite financial talking heads like Jim Cramer declaring the end was near, US stocks rocketed higher — bringing the Dow Jones Industrial Average over the 50,000 mark at one point.
Yet the federal government can’t stand when everyday Americans prosper. The bureaucrats in Washington, DC demand fealty to them and their authority first and foremost. A guy like Chief Justice John Roberts adheres to a specific orthodoxy — that special officials in the capitol, and building offices around the country with “federal” on their signage — they’re the real source of American greatness. Not business owners, or consumers, or free thinkers, innovators, hard workers, or 9-5 stiffs. The way to ensure that something is done right is to make sure it’s done by a government employee.
Thankfully, there’s some sanity left in Washington, DC. Justices Thomas, Alito, and Kavanaugh stood tall as “conservative” justices, penning a dissenting opinion “no one could disagree with,” as President Trump said. Now, 10s of billions of dollars may be owed to corporations and traders who imported goods and paid the tariffs. A years-long court battle will ensue, in a fight to claw money back, money that could be spent on the American taxpayer — but instead will go back toward some corporation.
All of this is happening while the USA runs an annual deficit. Tariffs are struck down while the US Treasury counts a $38.6 trillion dollar debt. But those are of no concern to the justices in black robes. Running out country — our society — headlong into financial ruin is perfectly “constitutional,” but levying taxes on foreign imports is not. Because like most things in Washington, DC — the focus is not whether the decision was proper, or smart, or wise. Instead, the focus is “who has the authority!?” And the majority opinion of the court is that the much-reviled legislators of the US Congress are the only humans who can decide on tariffs. You know, the same group of Congressional lawmakers who are to blame for the $38.6 trillion debt.
WATCH: President Trump Called the Decision a “Disgrace”
The good news is that President Trump has a plan. He said while foreign trading partners are “dancing in the streets” at the prospect of once again being able to rip off American consumers, they “won’t be dancing for long.” That’s because Trump quickly moved to enact a new 10% tariff — to apply in cases where his existing tariffs have been struck down. Because not all of them will be canceled by the SCOTUS decision.
It’s also no surprise that Chief Justice Roberts would side with government-first, big spend Democrats by striking down tariffs. He’s been the “gift” that keeps on giving from globalist President George W. Bush. The Supreme Court’s decision also means that President Trump’s goal of eventually eliminating the income tax, in favor of tariffs, may not be realistic.
Undogged by the court’s decision, Trump will head into next month’s high-stakes meeting with China fighting with one hand tied behind his back. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas said there’s no basis within the statutory text cited, or the Constitution itself, in terms of meddling with Trump’s decision. That said, there remains division among political conservatives as to what’s right and wrong with tariffs.
On the idea of replacing the income tax with tariffs: it’s a classic debate in conservative circles, harking back to pre-1913 America when tariffs were a primary revenue source. Proponents argue it could simplify the tax code, protect domestic industries, and shift the burden to foreign producers. But critics (including some economists on the right) argue out tariffs function like a consumption tax, hitting lower-income folks harder since they spend a bigger share of their earnings on imported goods.
Revenue-wise, Trump’s tariffs brought in over $200 billion so far, but fully axing the income tax (which generates trillions annually) would admittedly require tariffs on a massive scale—potentially sparking inflation, trade wars, and higher costs for everyday Americans.
The Court did not rule on the merits of Trump’s policy. The ruling just said Trump overstepped by using IEEPA as the vehicle got the tarrifs. Congress could still pass legislation to authorize similar tariffs or even explore tariff-based reforms.
In response to the court’s decision, US stocks rallied, and all three major indices finished in positive territory. So investors aren’t overly concerned, and President Trump has contingencies planned — as he knew all along this could be the end result. Democrats and some Republicans are framing it as a check on executive overreach. But there’s no denying that the three “conservatives” who let Trump down — Justices Amy Coney Barrett, Neil Gorsuch, and John Roberts — are beholden to the federal government. The American consumer, and voter, comes secondary to “how it’s always been done.”
