Absent action against price gouging, corp. concentration I bet we won’t get cheaper bananas, coffee, etc. ie. 3 corps have 80% of US banana sales, etc.

Firms can use tariffs as cover to up prices even if exporters cover tariff costs or goods arent tariffed and never cut... 5/5

It seems POTUS is feeling pressure from the Democrats' "affordability" election sweep.

So why not target the real cause of high beef prices -- 4 huge meatpackers controlling 85% of the US beef market! (Read @basel.bsky.social's great 9/24 report w/ FarmActionUS to learn more.) 4/

Obviously announcing tariffs cuts on items w/o tariffs won't cut prices

But tariff cuts on goods that do also won't likely cut prices

@RethinkTrade
tracked the consumer price index vs China tariff rate & corporate profits. Prices📈tracked corp profit trends not tariff levels 3/

So, there should never have been tariffs on “tropical products” like coffee, cocoa, pineapple, mangoes etc. that we don’t produce here. The elimination of these tariffs now seems to be the unfortunate Trump “READY, FIRE, AIM!” general tariff chaos. But🤔on beef and tomatoes! 2/

Thank you!

3) how difficult it is practically for Congress to use the vote IEEPA provides to end emergency declaration given a prez can veto so supermajority needed. The same conservative justice seemed to be sorting that v. what to make of what Congress meant w/ specific IEEPA terms.

...tariff authority because many of the conservative justices seemed concerned re. 1) lack of any bounds to administration's notion of the authority IEEPA grants a prez 2) where that broad delegation could lead re declarations of dif types of emergencies by dif presidents...

And, with that, the oral arguments WRAP.

Now festivities shift to front steps of the court, where litigants will do press.

My biggest takeaway: Tho oral arguments arent ispositive of where court will go, bet Trump staff will be dusting off other statutes that give a prez...

I do not envy SolGen having to make the latter argument with Pres. Trump constantly bragging about how much money the tariffs are bringing in AND the fact that the US trade deficit has increased during the period the tariffs have been in effect.

The SolGen then gets a rebuttal: He returns to notion of inherent Art. II prez powers and that these tariffs are NOT about revenue raising but aimed at countering crisis of too many imports/huge trade deficit and would be most successful if not $$ came in because fewer imports...

And Justice Sotomayor then notes two examples: Pres. Trump decided to impose a 10% tariff on Canada because he did not like a TV ad. He imposes high tariffs on Brazil because he does not like their legal system holding a former president accountible for criminal activity.

Sotomayor: Isn't the point that if it is about taxing Americans, then both chambers of Congress have to approve it? (Back to her starting argument that tariff is same as tax....) Do we allow a prez to use the taxing power to decide what he unilaterally thinks is good policy?

Gorsuch: White House says its high tariffs on India are to pressure that country in context of trying to end Russian hostities against Ukraine - a core foreign policy goal and serious emergency.

Sotomayor cuts in to help OR AG: Isnt the issue WHO decides not what tools is best?

Gorsuch probing about common sense meaning of IEEPA... How could it be that a Prez in oval office could say, we have an emergency w/ X country and I have to cut off all trade, cannot do something more calibrated? Why would Congress intend to limit a president's toolkit?

Gorsuch - but why would Congress intend to create that donut hole - you can cut off all trade but not impose a 1% tariff?
OR AG: A tariff is a totally different type of pastry!
Gorsuch: Good one (court room laughs)
OR AG: Tariffs are suspect b' they can be about revenue raising

OR AG: Tariffs are different - they are revenue measures. And only Congress has that authority.
Gorsuch jumps in: So in IEEPA Congress authorizes a prez to cut off all trade from all countries but not impose a 1% tariff?
OR AG: yes different things. One is trade & one is revenue

Now Oregon's AG Benjamin Gutman is up.

Justice Coney-B: So, if IEEPA allows quotas and embargoes, and authorizes a Prez to "regulate importation" how is it that it would not authorize tariffs? Quotas and embargoes are a more powerful way to regulate trade than tariffs?