<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Friday Talking Points -- SCOTUS Smacks Down Trump&#039;s Tariffs</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.chrisweigant.com/2026/02/20/friday-talking-points-scotus-smacks-down-trumps-tariffs/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.chrisweigant.com/2026/02/20/friday-talking-points-scotus-smacks-down-trumps-tariffs/</link>
	<description>Reality-based political commentary</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Apr 2026 18:49:38 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Kick</title>
		<link>http://www.chrisweigant.com/2026/02/20/friday-talking-points-scotus-smacks-down-trumps-tariffs/#comment-221953</link>
		<dc:creator>Kick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Feb 2026 09:10:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.chrisweigant.com/?p=27319#comment-221953</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;The Supreme Court left one gigantic question completely open, because their ruling does not address whether companies who paid the tariffs up until now will be entitled to a refund. &lt;/i&gt;

Those who sued to have them declared illegal decided not to petition for refunds so the SCOTUS did not address it. However, the tariffs thus being proclaimed illegal, the collection of which is thusly illegal, hence to retain the illegally acquired tariffs/taxes is also illegal and akin to theft. Also, all during the course of litigation regarding same, the government stated repetitively that it was A-okay to collect the tariffs/taxes because the government would refund them if they were declared illegal. So it&#039;s time for the government to pay up -- with interest -- as the government swore repeatedly in multiple pleadings (on paper) in courts all over America (including the SCOTUS) that it would refund said collected tariffs should they be deemed illegal. 

&lt;i&gt;Trump now hell-bent on imposing the same tariffs using different laws, and the deals made with other countries also up in the air, nobody has any clue what is going to come next. &lt;/i&gt;

As we&#039;ve discussed on this blog, there are multiple ways Trump can tax Americans via tariffs that are questionably legal, however definitely temporary. 

I have a clue that the same people who sued Trump and the United States to have the taxes declared illegal will now be suing Trump and the United States to hold them to their multiple and repeated &lt;b&gt;sworn&lt;/b&gt; statements that those tariffs/taxes would be refunded if they were declared unconstitutional.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>The Supreme Court left one gigantic question completely open, because their ruling does not address whether companies who paid the tariffs up until now will be entitled to a refund. </i></p>
<p>Those who sued to have them declared illegal decided not to petition for refunds so the SCOTUS did not address it. However, the tariffs thus being proclaimed illegal, the collection of which is thusly illegal, hence to retain the illegally acquired tariffs/taxes is also illegal and akin to theft. Also, all during the course of litigation regarding same, the government stated repetitively that it was A-okay to collect the tariffs/taxes because the government would refund them if they were declared illegal. So it's time for the government to pay up -- with interest -- as the government swore repeatedly in multiple pleadings (on paper) in courts all over America (including the SCOTUS) that it would refund said collected tariffs should they be deemed illegal. </p>
<p><i>Trump now hell-bent on imposing the same tariffs using different laws, and the deals made with other countries also up in the air, nobody has any clue what is going to come next. </i></p>
<p>As we've discussed on this blog, there are multiple ways Trump can tax Americans via tariffs that are questionably legal, however definitely temporary. </p>
<p>I have a clue that the same people who sued Trump and the United States to have the taxes declared illegal will now be suing Trump and the United States to hold them to their multiple and repeated <b>sworn</b> statements that those tariffs/taxes would be refunded if they were declared unconstitutional.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: nypoet22</title>
		<link>http://www.chrisweigant.com/2026/02/20/friday-talking-points-scotus-smacks-down-trumps-tariffs/#comment-221930</link>
		<dc:creator>nypoet22</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 Feb 2026 20:39:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.chrisweigant.com/?p=27319#comment-221930</guid>
		<description>@cw,

since you&#039;re having trouble lately finding Democrats to be disappointed in, may i suggest Joel Klein, former NYC schools chancellor, for his supporting role in the Epstein files. Joel Klein, exploiting children&#039;s suffering for his own financial and political gain? color me shocked.

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/02/14/us/how-former-nyc-schools-chief-joel-klein-became-friendly-with-epstein.html</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@cw,</p>
<p>since you're having trouble lately finding Democrats to be disappointed in, may i suggest Joel Klein, former NYC schools chancellor, for his supporting role in the Epstein files. Joel Klein, exploiting children's suffering for his own financial and political gain? color me shocked.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2026/02/14/us/how-former-nyc-schools-chief-joel-klein-became-friendly-with-epstein.html" rel="nofollow">https://www.nytimes.com/2026/02/14/us/how-former-nyc-schools-chief-joel-klein-became-friendly-with-epstein.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: italyrusty</title>
		<link>http://www.chrisweigant.com/2026/02/20/friday-talking-points-scotus-smacks-down-trumps-tariffs/#comment-221927</link>
		<dc:creator>italyrusty</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 Feb 2026 08:51:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.chrisweigant.com/?p=27319#comment-221927</guid>
		<description>Should we be shocked that Trump&#039;s march to war with Iran is NOT the top story in any of my &quot;reliable sources&quot;?

This feels very much like the days prior to Shrub&#039;s disastrous invasion of Iraq, with the difference that the Stable Genius isn&#039;t even trying to invent a &quot;weapons of mass destruction&quot; excuse for invading a sovereign country that has NOT attacked the U.S.

On that day, the U.S. ceded the moral high ground in the eyes of many countries about human rights and international law. When we bomb Tehran, the U.S. will have become the equivalent of Putin-led Russia and Iran will be Ukraine.

The only difference will be that many stupid Americans who abhorred Trump&#039;s horrible actions until today will feel compelled by &quot;patriotism&quot; to defend &quot;the troops&quot;.

Wag the Dog indeed.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Should we be shocked that Trump's march to war with Iran is NOT the top story in any of my "reliable sources"?</p>
<p>This feels very much like the days prior to Shrub's disastrous invasion of Iraq, with the difference that the Stable Genius isn't even trying to invent a "weapons of mass destruction" excuse for invading a sovereign country that has NOT attacked the U.S.</p>
<p>On that day, the U.S. ceded the moral high ground in the eyes of many countries about human rights and international law. When we bomb Tehran, the U.S. will have become the equivalent of Putin-led Russia and Iran will be Ukraine.</p>
<p>The only difference will be that many stupid Americans who abhorred Trump's horrible actions until today will feel compelled by "patriotism" to defend "the troops".</p>
<p>Wag the Dog indeed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: italyrusty</title>
		<link>http://www.chrisweigant.com/2026/02/20/friday-talking-points-scotus-smacks-down-trumps-tariffs/#comment-221926</link>
		<dc:creator>italyrusty</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 Feb 2026 08:43:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.chrisweigant.com/?p=27319#comment-221926</guid>
		<description>Re: &quot;The law Trump used today to institute a new 10 percent tariff on the world requires Congress to vote to extend such tariffs beyond 150 days. Five months from now would be the end of the summer -- right when the midterm election campaign should be heating up. Are vulnerable Republicans really going to rush to support tariffs their constituents hate right before an election?&quot;

Republican watchers have cited an even earlier deadline for when many House Republicans suddenly grow a spine: the filing deadline for their primaries. If a Republican in a &quot;safe&quot; seat can avoid a Trump-endorsed primary opponent, s/he will presumably glide to easy reelection in November. And Trump will not be on the ballot in 2028 (many wags were already calling him a &quot;lame-duck President&quot; after the November 2025 Democratic &quot;wave&quot;), so his influence will also presumably be in decline.

Every Republican after the &quot;all clear&quot; day can be as rebellious as Rep. Massey.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Re: "The law Trump used today to institute a new 10 percent tariff on the world requires Congress to vote to extend such tariffs beyond 150 days. Five months from now would be the end of the summer -- right when the midterm election campaign should be heating up. Are vulnerable Republicans really going to rush to support tariffs their constituents hate right before an election?"</p>
<p>Republican watchers have cited an even earlier deadline for when many House Republicans suddenly grow a spine: the filing deadline for their primaries. If a Republican in a "safe" seat can avoid a Trump-endorsed primary opponent, s/he will presumably glide to easy reelection in November. And Trump will not be on the ballot in 2028 (many wags were already calling him a "lame-duck President" after the November 2025 Democratic "wave"), so his influence will also presumably be in decline.</p>
<p>Every Republican after the "all clear" day can be as rebellious as Rep. Massey.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: nypoet22</title>
		<link>http://www.chrisweigant.com/2026/02/20/friday-talking-points-scotus-smacks-down-trumps-tariffs/#comment-221923</link>
		<dc:creator>nypoet22</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 Feb 2026 04:31:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.chrisweigant.com/?p=27319#comment-221923</guid>
		<description>another US citizen named Ruben Ray Martinez was shot dead by an ICE agent in Texas, apparently last March. the official story of that death is also a bit suspicious, but there weren&#039;t a ton of people with phones around to record what actually happened. bodycam footage around the incident has been requested but is not yet available. I&#039;m not prejudging this, maybe the guy really was driving recklessly and ignoring instructions, but given the obviously false official stories around Good and Pretti, I believe the agency can no longer be afforded the benefit of the doubt.
JL</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>another US citizen named Ruben Ray Martinez was shot dead by an ICE agent in Texas, apparently last March. the official story of that death is also a bit suspicious, but there weren't a ton of people with phones around to record what actually happened. bodycam footage around the incident has been requested but is not yet available. I'm not prejudging this, maybe the guy really was driving recklessly and ignoring instructions, but given the obviously false official stories around Good and Pretti, I believe the agency can no longer be afforded the benefit of the doubt.<br />
JL</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: nypoet22</title>
		<link>http://www.chrisweigant.com/2026/02/20/friday-talking-points-scotus-smacks-down-trumps-tariffs/#comment-221922</link>
		<dc:creator>nypoet22</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 Feb 2026 04:11:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.chrisweigant.com/?p=27319#comment-221922</guid>
		<description>now that trump import tax 1.0 is over, the next round of tariffs has already been initiated, supposedly under a different legal pretext. i wonder... since it&#039;s going to be challenging to get paid back for illegal tariffs that have already been paid, why can&#039;t companies just temporarily claim those payments as credit toward any future tariffs, just in case those somehow turn out to be legal.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>now that trump import tax 1.0 is over, the next round of tariffs has already been initiated, supposedly under a different legal pretext. i wonder... since it's going to be challenging to get paid back for illegal tariffs that have already been paid, why can't companies just temporarily claim those payments as credit toward any future tariffs, just in case those somehow turn out to be legal.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
