Trunp loses again in Court
POSTED BY: THG
UPDATED: Tuesday, September 1, 2026 04:15
VIEWED: 52231
PAGE 68 of 100
Quote:
Originally posted by THG:
Judge Chutkan green lights a lawsuit challenging Trump’s “tyranny” and use of Musk/DOGE, while issuing a surprise ruling involving Trump himself.
Oh. Do be sure to keep us up to date on this one, Ted.
Riveting, edge of your seat stuff. Truly.
--------------------------------------------------
"I don't find this stuff amusing anymore." ~Paul Simon
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
First let me say, I told you so. Big time, I told you so.
Trump is constantly being told by the federal courts he is breaking the law. And they are blocking what he is doing, again and again and again and again and so on. The man thinks he is a dictator. Everything he is doing adds up to being a slow coup. And he is at lighting speed, being shut down.
T 
Trump TARIFFS declared UNLAWFUL by Court!!!
Stunning ruling by a federal court striking down Donald Trump’s tariffs against the world.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
You didn't tell anybody anything worth telling, and whatever clickbait you just posted means nothing.
Nobody cares, Ted.
You did that.
--------------------------------------------------
"I don't find this stuff amusing anymore." ~Paul Simon
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
A three-judge panel at the US Court of International Trade, a relatively low-profile court in Manhattan, stopped Trump’s global tariffs that he imposed citing emergency economic powers
Low-level scrub activist judges.
They will be curb stomped on appeal.
*yawn*
Next.
--------------------------------------------------
"I don't find this stuff amusing anymore." ~Paul Simon
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Trump's only hope is if more than half of the Supreme Court is 100% corrupt.
T
Trump IN SHAMBLES as PERSONALLY Chosen Court BLOWS UP His PLAN
In shocking news, Trump's chosen court, the Court of International Trade, has just found his entire Tariff plan to be unconstitutional and blocked.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I'm sure it did, Ted. I'm sure it did.
--------------------------------------------------
"I don't find this stuff amusing anymore." ~Paul Simon
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
--------------------------------------------------
"I don't find this stuff amusing anymore." ~Paul Simon
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Striking Down Trump’s Tariffs Isn’t a Judicial Coup
Congress, not the executive branch, has the power to enact tariffs.
By Conor Friedersdorf | May 29, 2025, 10:09 AM ET
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2025/05/trump-tariffs-court-
rulings/682964/
The debate over President Donald Trump’s tariffs often focuses on whether they are prudent. Defenders insist that Trump’s tariffs will help make America great again and boost national security. Critics counter that they’ll wreck the economy. But the strongest argument against the tariffs is actually that they are unlawful. Neither the Constitution nor any statute authorizes Trump to impose what he ordered.
Now, months after sticklers for the rule of law began making that argument, it has finally been vindicated: Yesterday, the United States Court of International Trade, the federal court with jurisdiction over civil actions related to tariffs, struck down almost all of Trump’s tariffs in a 49-page ruling. The decision includes a detailed discussion of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, the 1977 law delegating increased power over trade to the president during national emergencies, which the White House had cited to support its moves. It concludes that the law does not authorize any of Trump’s tariff orders. https://www.cit.uscourts.gov/sites/cit/files/25-66.pdf
Administration officials quickly challenged the ruling’s legitimacy. “It is not for unelected judges to decide how to properly address a national emergency,” White House spokesperson Kush Desai said in a statement. “The judicial coup is out of control,” Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller posted on social media. But their objections are dubious, not because the judiciary never overreaches, but because at least three features of this dispute make the argument for judicial overreach here especially weak.
First, the Constitution is clear: Article I delegates the tariff power to Congress, and Article II fails to vest that power in the presidency. So the Trump administration begins from a weak position. And the court’s ruling did not arrogate the tariff power to the judiciary, which might have warranted describing it as “a judicial coup.” It merely affirmed Congress’s power over tariffs. Americans need not fear a judicial dictatorship here. Congress can do whatever it likes. Indeed, it could pass a law reinstating all of Trump’s tariffs today without violating the court’s ruling. But Congress is extremely unlikely to do so, in part because Trump’s tariff policy clearly lacks public support; for example, a recent poll found that 63 percent of Americans disapprove of it.
Second, the plaintiffs in this particular lawsuit include the states of Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, and Vermont––all democratically accountable entities in a federal system where states are meant to act as a check on unlawful exercises of federal power. All of those states asked the court to rule in this manner to vindicate their rights under the law. As Oregon’s attorney general put it, “We brought this case because the Constitution doesn’t give any president unchecked authority to upend the economy.” States controlled by both Republicans and Democrats routinely file lawsuits asking the judiciary to strike down purportedly unlawful actions by the president. There is bipartisan consensus that such judicial review is legitimate, not couplike, and such rulings have constrained presidents from both parties.
Third, when Congress created the Court of International Trade and later defined its jurisdiction, its precise intent was to create an arm of the judiciary that would exercise authority over trade disputes. Congress made a deliberate choice to alter an earlier law vesting that power in the Treasury Department, under the executive branch, and deliberately vested it in a court instead. To quote from the 1980 law that defined its powers, “The Court of International Trade shall have exclusive jurisdiction of any civil action commenced against the United
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by second:
Striking Down Trump’s Tariffs Isn’t a Judicial Coup
Yes. It is.
And they will soon be ignored and dealt with accordingly.
Tick Tock
The world you thought you were living in 6 months ago is dead. Forever.
Get used to it.
--------------------------------------------------
"I don't find this stuff amusing anymore." ~Paul Simon
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Justice Jackson’s Dissent in Maine Transgender Case Cites an Unlikely Authority — Justice Amy Coney Barrett
https://www.nysun.com/article/justice-jacksons-dissent-in-maine-transg
ender-case-cites-an-unlikely-authority-justice-amy-coney-barrett
Amy Coney Barrett BETRAYS Trump, SIDES With Liberals Over Trump Deportations
Quote:
Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:
and dealt with accordingly.
dealt with by the Supreme Amy that he appointed?
Trump administration has lost a shocking 96% of rulings in federal district courts so far this month, a new analysis shows. The rulings against the president came from judges across the ideological spectrum.
https://x.com/DemocracyDocket/status/1928090695505523076
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME