Re:Judge Orders Government to Begin Refunding More Than $130...
by rayiner on Thursday March 05, 2026 @10:43AM
(#47262958)
You’re piling speculation on speculation. First of all, there was no such memo saying the tariffs were “very likely to be overturned.” The Supreme Court decision was 7-3, with two Bush appointees voting to uphold the tariffs. The appellate court decision was 7-4, with two Obama appointees and two Bush appointees dissenting. Second of all, there is no evidence that this legal analysis was leaked to Cantor.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Judge Orders Government to Begin Refunding More Than $130...
by Ajakks on Thursday March 05, 2026 @11:21AM
(#47263587)
Who cares? The Treasury Secretary shouldn't have family profiting off fixing illegal policy the Treasury Secretary enacted. That should never happen. It is wrong, it doesn't explicitly spelled out.
Re:Judge Orders Government to Begin Refunding More Than $130...
by vel0city on Thursday March 05, 2026 @12:15PM
(#47264325)
Commerce* Secretary. Lutnick is the Secretary of Commerce which implements tariff policy. Bessent is the Treasury Secretary.
Re:Judge Orders Government to Begin Refunding More Than $130...
by burkaman on Thursday March 05, 2026 @12:49PM
(#47264811)
The two answers I'm hearing to my question so far are that either this decision was so obvious that anyone could have predicted it without insider information, or that this was a split decision that the administration could not have predicted ahead of time.
You're right that maybe there never was any internal memo, just thought this was funny.
Re:Judge Orders Government to Begin Refunding More Than $130...
by tzs on Thursday March 05, 2026 @05:55PM
(#47268397)
Wait...how do we know there was no such memo?
We have no reason to believe that if such a memo exists it was used improperly, but I don't see how we could know there is no such memo.
BTW you've got an extra Justice on the Supreme Court. Should be 6-3, not 7-3.
Re:Judge Orders Government to Begin Refunding More Than $130...
by rayiner on Thursday March 05, 2026 @09:25PM
(#47270055)
> but I don't see how we could know there is no such memo.
There was no such memo because OLC isn’t full of dummies. Maybe the talking heads on CNN said the case against the tariffs was a slam dunk, but you don’t get split courts at multiple levels for cases that are slam dunks.