Doesn't Trump own the Supreme Court?

@Mott-The-Hoople said
Kind of makes you libs look like fools when you claim scotus is biased toward Trump doesnt it?

It is you looks the fool… Note your point of view is that there should be tit for tat between the president and Scotus. And that we should be pissed off that Scotus is not helping the president since he helped them. That is what you are saying. Me, I do not think like a liberal as you do, I am the opposite of pissed, I am very happy to see that the perfect structure of our country is working just fine.

First, the U.S. Supreme Court is not supposed to “do favors” for any president — including one who appointed some of the justices. Once confirmed, justices don’t work for the president. They serve under

SCOTUS isn’t there to repay political debts. If they ruled against Trump on tariffs, it means they believed the law or the Constitution required it. That’s actually how judicial independence is supposed to work. Fool.

If we think the Court owes Trump because he appointed justices, then we’re basically saying judges are political assets, not constitutional referees. You are the fool

@kmax87 said
Well its good to see you will continue to support an independent SCOTUS.

Always have...when is the last time you saw a lib scotus vote against a democrat?

@Mott-The-Hoople said
Are you claiming congress did not delegate the power to regulate imports to the president?

"Regulate" and "tax" are two different things as the Constitution makes clear in Article I, Section 8.

@AverageJoe1 said
hahaha. Y'all fail to see how smart trump is. He knew that he ( he apparently does NOT own SCOTUS) would lose the tariff thingy, and is positioned now to get the tariff thing done another way, under other laws, statutes, code sections.
Get this.....all SCOTUS did in the big picture was to tell him he did UNDER THE WRONG VEHICLE!!!!!
He will use aother one. Get ready to Make America Great Again!!! Get on the train.

LMAO! He's been throwing childish temper tantrums about the ruling since it came out.

@no1marauder said
"Regulate" and "tax" are two different things as the Constitution makes clear in Article I, Section 8.

Congress delegated that authority to the president. Tariffs have been levied by the president before Trump.

@AverageJoe1 said
It is you looks the fool… Note your point of view is that there should be tit for tat between the president and Scotus. And that we should be pissed off that Scotus is not helping the president since he helped them. That is what you are saying. Me, I do not think like a liberal as you do, I am the opposite of pissed, I am very happy to see that the perfect structure of o ...[text shortened]... we’re basically saying judges are political assets, not constitutional referees. You are the fool

You're talking to Mott, AKA Irony Man, a dyed-in-the-wool Trumpublican.

Are you stupid?

@Ponderable said
* There is a notice in the MINORITY opinion on that. The way to really do it is to ask congress, but would 47 ask anybody?

* What about this ad hominem attack against Kamala Harris? You do know that Trump mainly was the "official" author of his book?

Except it cannot be argued that he wrote even a word of it.

Tony Schwartz wrote The Art of the Deal.

@kmax87 said
Well its good to see you will continue to support an independent SCOTUS.

The only way to do that is for the other Justices to unclench from Alito, Thomas and Kavanaugh.

@Mott-The-Hoople said
Congress delegated that authority to the president. Tariffs have been levied by the president before Trump.

Not under the IEEPA.

@no1marauder said
Not under the IEEPA.

The ruling was that the president has power to regulate foreign imports, but not levy tariffs.

Precedent cases have ruled that regulating does include the use of tariffs.

Its not coming together with former rulings

@Mott-The-Hoople said
The ruling was that the president has power to regulate foreign imports, but not levy tariffs.

Precedent cases have ruled that regulating does include the use of tariffs.

Its not coming together with former rulings

You obviously didn't read it.

The ruling was that Congress in the IEEPA did not delegate the President the authority to impose tariffs.(something no President had ever done using the IEEPA).

That's it.

@no1marauder said
LMAO! He's been throwing childish temper tantrums about the ruling since it came out.

You are so naïve. Everything he does is drama and preplanned and is sending messages left and right as he craftily wends his way to perfection and success..
Do you really think for a second that this winter winds about anything, when he always is about three steps ahead? We all know that he knew he would lose. So if he were just a standard fella, he would say yeah I knew that was gonna happen or something like that , but no, he is milking it for all it’s worth. Life and deals are all just a game to Trump.

@Suzianne said
You're talking to Mott, AKA Irony Man, a dyed-in-the-wool Trumpublican.

Are you stupid?

Oops, all this moves so fast, I am more a snail, …..should I repost to Kmax, intended recipient?
Naa, everyone picked up on it except you

@Suzianne said
Except it cannot be argued that he wrote even a word of it.

Tony Schwartz wrote The Art of the Deal.

Would ‘you guys’ start a separate thread on Trumps book. You are all making me sleepy

@AverageJoe1 said
You are so naïve. Everything he does is drama and preplanned and is sending messages left and right as he craftily wends his way to perfection and success..
Do you really think for a second that this winter winds about anything, when he always is about three steps ahead? We all know that he knew he would lose. So if he were just a standard fella, he would say yeah I ...[text shortened]... e that , but no, he is milking it for all it’s worth. Life and deals are all just a game to Trump.

You might think he has such Godlike powers, but most see the silly, petty narcissist he really is.

His outbursts are undignified and unworthy of any adult, never mind a President of the United States.