The Tariff Ruling Impacts Several Pillars of Trump’s Political Agenda
The U.S. president will have a harder time acting on his protectionist instincts. But he’s also losing his leverage in both foreign and domestic policy.
Predicted catastrophes seldom materialize. And yet, on Friday, U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration seemingly experienced just that — at least from its perspective. The ruling by which the U.S. Supreme Court struck down all tariffs based on the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977 deals a blow to several key pillars of Trump’s political agenda.
One obvious point is this: Contrary to what nearly all leading economists recommend, Trump believes that steep import taxes help the economy by protecting and stimulating it. This is one of Trump’s core beliefs — one of the few positions he hasn’t changed in decades.
Cracks in the Trump Illusion
Moreover, the ruling targets an important instrument of Trump’s foreign policy. Canada, the EU, India, South Africa, Brazil — Trump wanted to force his will on all of these, in part by using tariffs. Now, he needs to find another means of exerting pressure. From Europe’s point of view, there is a real fear that the U.S. will increasingly threaten to withdraw its military protection.
Above all, though, the decision is aimed at another cornerstone of Trump’s style of governance. Until now, Trump and his advisers have repeatedly insisted that the U.S. president can pretty much do whatever he wants and that the pesky Congress need only be consulted rarely. This is an illusion that the Republican congressional majority has allowed to persist through its refusal to act — even on matters of war and peace. But it’s still an illusion. Now, the cracks in it are starting to show.
Two ‘Pro-Trump’ Votes
Whether the ruling will do lasting damage to Trump remains unclear. Much depends on whether he can keep his anger in check. Angry, hate-filled remarks directed at the Supreme Court are likely to appeal only to a small number of voters — and probably few members of his own party. It wouldn’t be that easy to back them up with arguments, either. It was the votes of two of Trump’s first-term nominees, Amy Coney Barrett and Neil Gorsuch, that tipped the outcome.
The political damage could remain limited if the response mainly consists of symbolic gestures — or if the proposed replacement tariffs prove to be fairly ineffectual. That could even give his Republican colleagues reason to hope they’ll profit from a stronger economy in the upcoming fall midterms.
Predicted catastrophes seldom materialize. And yet, on Friday, U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration seemingly experienced just that — at least from its perspective. The ruling by which the U.S. Supreme Court struck down all tariffs based on the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977 deals a blow to several key pillars of Trump’s political agenda.
One obvious point is this: Contrary to what nearly all leading economists recommend, Trump believes that steep import taxes help the economy by protecting and stimulating it. This is one of Trump’s core beliefs — one of the few positions he hasn’t changed in decades.
Cracks in the Trump Illusion
Moreover, the ruling targets an important instrument of Trump’s foreign policy. Canada, the EU, India, South Africa, Brazil — Trump wanted to force his will on all of these, in part by using tariffs. Now, he needs to find another means of exerting pressure. From Europe’s point of view, there is a real fear that the U.S. will increasingly threaten to withdraw its military protection.
Above all, though, the decision is aimed at another cornerstone of Trump’s style of governance. Until now, Trump and his advisers have repeatedly insisted that the U.S. president can pretty much do whatever he wants and that the pesky Congress need only be consulted rarely. This is an illusion that the Republican congressional majority has allowed to persist through its refusal to act — even on matters of war and peace. But it’s still an illusion. Now, the cracks in it are starting to show.
Two ‘Pro-Trump’ Votes
Whether the ruling will do lasting damage to Trump remains unclear. Much depends on whether he can keep his anger in check. Angry, hate-filled remarks directed at the Supreme Court are likely to appeal only to a small number of voters — and probably few members of his own party. It wouldn’t be that easy to back them up with arguments, either. It was the votes of two of Trump’s first-term nominees, Amy Coney Barrett and Neil Gorsuch, that tipped the outcome.
The political damage could remain limited if the response mainly consists of symbolic gestures — or if the proposed replacement tariffs prove to be fairly ineffectual. That could even give his Republican colleagues reason to hope they’ll profit from a stronger economy in the upcoming fall midterms.
Previous article![]( "World Helplessness!")
Next article![]( "Why Trump’s Poll Numbers Are Cratering")
