Why Trump’s Tariff Meltdowns Play Right Into SCOTUS’ Hands

Why Trump’s Tariff Meltdowns Play Right Into SCOTUS’ Hands

Good for SCOTUS on pushing back against Trump on tariffs, but do they really deserve much credit? And why did it take so long?

The justices took just weeks in 2024 to grant “presumptive” immunity for acts committed as president—surely a much thornier issue—including insurrection and election subversion, clearing the path for Trump to be on the presidential ballot and win a second term. So if the Constitution is so clear that tariffs are a tax, and that Trump’s extortionary leverage thereof is illegal, why the months since oral arguments?

The majority opinion written by Chief Justice John Roberts was a crisp 21 pages, not that complicated or bogged down by legalese. By simply calling a tariff what it is, SCOTUS upended Trump’s economic policy, and lifted (even if temporarily) the burden placed callously on small businesses and giant corporations alike while the president claimed foreign countries were footing the bill.

However good it feels, the court’s ruling heralds more chaos in the global markets and makes an already dangerous president more unpredictable. In the tantrum on Friday, he threw in the White House pressroom, Trump asked plaintively why the justices didn’t include a ruling on the money raised through tariffs, and what to do with it. Truth is, it’s already mostly spent and spoken for. (And those $2000 checks Trump promised every citizen won’t be going out anytime soon.)