Tuesday, January 13, 2026

Trump Warns 'we're screwed' If SCOTUS Strikes Down Tariffs

President Donald Trump issued a stark warning on Monday, saying the U.S. would be "screwed" if the Supreme Court overturns his authority to impose tariffs.

Posted by lamplighter at 05:32 PM | 33 COMMENTS | permalink

More

Trump warns of 'complete mess' if supreme court rejects tariffs

[image or embed]

-- The Guardian (@theguardian.com) Jan 13, 2026 at 4:00 AM

Comments

More from the article ...

... "Remember, when America shines brightly, the World shines brightly," Trump said on Truth Social. "In other words, if the Supreme Court rules against the United States of America on this National Security bonanza, WE'RE SCREWED!"

The Trump administration has relied on the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA, as the legal basis for imposing the tariffs. During November's oral arguments, however, several justices appeared skeptical over whether the law can be used for that purpose.

Chief Justice John Roberts noted the statute has never before been used to justify tariffs, while Justice Neil Gorsuch raised concerns about the scope of executive power if the law were interpreted to allow them.

Trump said a ruling against his administration could require the U.S. to repay tariff revenue totaling hundreds of billions of dollars, with costs potentially reaching into the trillions once foreign governments' and companies' investments are factored in. ...


#1 | Posted by LampLighter at 2026-01-12 08:52 PM

if the Supreme Court rules against the United States of America

They won't.

#2 | Posted by REDIAL at 2026-01-12 08:53 PM

@#1

So many questions/comments.

I'll start here ...

... "In other words, if the Supreme Court rules against the United States of America on this National Security bonanza, WE'RE SCREWED!" ...

SCOTUS would not rule against the United States of America if they struck down his tariffs.

SCOTUS would rule in favor of the rule of law.


#3 | Posted by LampLighter at 2026-01-12 08:54 PM

SCOTUS would rule in favor of the rule of law.

The new Rule of Law is "America First, and ---- everyone else".

#4 | Posted by REDIAL at 2026-01-12 08:57 PM

Republicans love fascism, until it starts noticeably hurting the economy.

Once it starts affecting the economy, only then will a tiny minority of Republicans begin to have second thoughts.

#5 | Posted by snoofy at 2026-01-12 09:01 PM

In other words, the stupid fat bastard would be screwed. ---- the fat bald pedo bitch

#6 | Posted by LegallyYourDead at 2026-01-12 09:04 PM

Once it starts affecting the economy, only then will a tiny minority of Republicans begin to have second thoughts.

How would they know?

#7 | Posted by REDIAL at 2026-01-12 09:10 PM

@#2 ... They won't. ...

I'm 50/50 at this point.

Good questions were raised during the hearings.

And a skepticism seemed to be present.

But, is the current SCOTUS allowed to rule against Pres Trump?



#8 | Posted by LampLighter at 2026-01-12 09:10 PM

Just a reminder

President Piggy enacts obviously illegal tariffs

Corporations pay obviously illegal tariffs

Corporations raise prices on goods subject to obviously illegal tariffs

Regular people pay higher prices for goods subject to obviously illegal tariffs

One corporation sues that the obviously illegal tariffs are illegal

SC will soon rule that obviously illegal tariffs are illegal

Many corporations are suing to recover money paid for obviously illegal tariffs

Federal Government will reimburse Corporations for the money they paid for obviously illegal tariffs

Corporations will have a very good first quarter of 2026

It is estimated that around 195 to 200 billion dollars have been generated from the obviously illegal tariffs

Per Google AI: Yale Budget Lab: Estimates new 2025 tariffs could cost the average household around $2,400 annually, with losses for lower-income families even higher as a share of their income, potentially reaching $3,800 in losses from all 2025 tariffs.

That is theft ladies and gentlemen.

That is the illegal transfer of money from YOUR pocket to corporations.

It is illegal because the money was stolen. Illegal tariffs mean the money was taken illegally. Just because there was a middleman does not make it any less of a theft

Every higher priced coffee or candy bar you buy is the theft of YOUR money

That is your money being stolen.

It's ALMOST like it was planned.

#9 | Posted by truthhurts at 2026-01-12 09:11 PM

I'm 50/50 at this point.

SCOTUS is 6/3.

#10 | Posted by REDIAL at 2026-01-12 09:15 PM

@#9 ... That is your money being stolen. ...

All I've heard so far is ~how difficult it would be~ to return the money to the consumers who paid it.

#11 | Posted by LampLighter at 2026-01-12 09:55 PM

FTFY

SCOTUS is 6/3.

#12 | Posted by LampLighter at 2026-01-12 09:56 PM

If and when SCOTUS overturns Trump's use of tariffs, the federal government will have to refund that $200,000,000,000.00 to corporations.

Not to those of us who had to spend more because of the tariffs.

Nope. That $200,000,000,000.00 will go to the corporations who imported goods and paid the tariffs.

So, you and I paid more for goods over the past whatever months to corporations who paid the federal government the tariffs.

So, when tariffs are refunded, they go back to the corporations, right?

And, will the corporations be sending checks to you and I, because that would be the right thing to do?

LOL!

Just more transfer of wealth from the poor and middle class to the wealthy.

Almost like it was planned.

And then there's THIS problem:

"A dividend of at least $2,000 a person (not including high income people!) will be paid to everyone," Pedodent Vladimir Netanyahu Trumpf.

OK, some simple math here (and not MAGA math or with Vernon's calculator)

US Population: 342,000,000

US population minus the 10-15% or so ~high-income~ folk: 300,000,000

So, okay, let's go ...

300,000,000 people times $2,000.00 per person is $600,000,000,000.00.

Tariff collection so far in 2025 has been around $200,000,000,000.00.

But we've already determined that that $200,000,000,000.00 was going to go to corporations, right?

So, where will the $600,000,000,000.00 come from?

#13 | Posted by A_Friend at 2026-01-12 10:02 PM

@#13 ... That $200,000,000,000.00 will go to the corporations who imported goods and paid the tariffs. ...

Oh, I'm sure those corporations have kept detailed records of who they passed the tariff costs to, and will be quite eager to be sending checks to cash customers or issuing credits to credit card customers.


/s



#14 | Posted by LampLighter at 2026-01-12 10:23 PM

#14 LOL!

#15 | Posted by A_Friend at 2026-01-12 10:28 PM

I'm willing to bet some of it will go back to customers.

Business customers.

As did the rest of our industry, we passed some of these costs on to foreign customers. We had to add a "tariffs" line to our global sales system; just making that change must have cost us an easy million.

So, we know exactly how much our customers paid, I would expect if we're getting it back, they're very likely getting something back.

You gotta love the Republican logic here. Just have successful global companies collect taxes for Uncle Sam from their international customers, what could go wrong? Like we're still gonna win those customers when the foreign competition isn't forced to add a surcharge to the bottom line like we are. Or maybe were supposed to take that as a loss, Wall Street loves when successful companies do that. Just unimaginably stupid policy for any American company with a global presence. Deliberately hamstring companies whose business dares to appeal to blacks and browns and --------- countries.

#16 | Posted by snoofy at 2026-01-12 10:38 PM

@#15

Yeah.

You noticed that also in my comment.

:)

#17 | Posted by LampLighter at 2026-01-12 10:48 PM

@#16 ... Just unimaginably stupid policy for any American company with a global presence. ..

America First!

#18 | Posted by LampLighter at 2026-01-12 10:51 PM


Ian Dury and The Blockheads -- Reasons To Be Cheerful, Pt. 3 (1979)
www.youtube.com

Lyrics excerpt ..

-- video has the lyrics --


#19 | Posted by LampLighter at 2026-01-12 10:55 PM

The new Rule of Law is "America First, and ---- everyone else".

#4 | POSTED BY REDIAL

Or

He who hath the Gold maketh the Rules.

#20 | Posted by donnerboy at 2026-01-13 10:32 AM

Us govt: collection is painless, refund is unpatriotic.

#21 | Posted by fresno500 at 2026-01-13 12:29 PM

If SCOTUS rules the tariffs have to be paid back; my hunch is that the tariff money is long gone and we the taxpayers will get to pay the tariffs twice.

Fun stuff!

#22 | Posted by horstngraben at 2026-01-13 05:40 PM

#24 I don't live in Pennsylvania. So I can't vote for Fetterman.

Oh, and friendly suggestion: Typing in ALL CAPS is called shouting.

And it is generally frowned upon as a standard way of posting (not so for emphasizing a point within a comment).

No one really enjoys being shouted at.*

* unless that's that person's kink, of course.

#26 | Posted by A_Friend at 2026-01-13 06:12 PM

Another friendly suggestion:

Typing in excessive bold and italics is painful to read.

#27 | Posted by BellRinger at 2026-01-13 06:39 PM

#27 Painful for you to read, bell boi?

Bonus.

#28 | Posted by A_Friend at 2026-01-13 06:41 PM

Trump Warns 'we're screwed' If SCOTUS Strikes Down Tariffs

"We're"?

No.

He is screwed.

He is using tariffs to personally enrich himself.

He announces tariffs and nations and companies write checks or buy his crypto in order to be granted exemptions.

If SCOTUS rules them illegal, his corrupt cash flow stops.

#31 | Posted by Nixon at 2026-01-15 07:34 AM

One thing you can be sure of, and that is the following prediction...whatever happens to you or me, trump and his gang of goons will not be screwed, they will walk off into the sunset with billions looted from the treasury one way or another.

#32 | Posted by Hughmass at 2026-01-15 07:37 AM

Either way the population is screwed.

If they rule in favor of Trump, economic hardship will continue and will likely increase.

If they rule against Trump, it will be a bonanza of cash for the companies who already passed it on to the end consumer while said end consumers are out the money but now own the public debt it took to repay the companies that already profited.

#33 | Posted by jpw at 2026-01-15 10:51 AM

Drudge Retort Headlines

Bill Allows State to Suspend Officials who Support DEI (49 comments)

Kash Patel to Have FBI Agents Trained by UFC Fighters (47 comments)

Trump Says He's No Longer Interested in Nobel Peace Prize (30 comments)

FCC Chair Threatens Broadcasters over Iran War Coverage (30 comments)

Trump: Nato Faces 'very Bad' Future If They Don't Help Him (23 comments)

Tucker Carlson says Trump's DOJ is Coming for Him (19 comments)

Trump Accuser Got Payoff from Jeffrey Epstein Estate, Says Dem Lawmaker (18 comments)

Trump Blames Recent Attacks on 'genetics' of Assailants (17 comments)

Iran War Squeezes Farmers Further (17 comments)

3 More Iran Football Team Members Change Minds over Asylum (16 comments)