When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Howard Lutnick is the US Secretary of Commerce, appointed by President Trump last year.
Mr. Lutnick has been a very outspoken advocate of President Trump's tariff policy.
These are Howard Lutnick's sons, Brandon and Kyle Lutnick:
When their father stepped down as the chief of financial services firm Cantor Fitzgerald last year, Brandon and Kyle took over for him.
Since then, Cantor Fitzgerald has been betting against the Trump administration's tariff policy. Specifically, by purchasing the right to collect any refunds owed to the US companies which have paying these tariffs for the past year in the event that the tariffs should be struck down, generally for 20 - 30% of the anticipated refund value.
What a surprise it is that the majority-conservative Supreme Court just struck down the administration's tariff policy, which means that Cantor Fitzgerald will now be roughly quadrupling the investments it has been making in this area over the past year.
The reason progressives were more excited than a new puppy yesterday is that they correctly perceive that President Trump's tariffs are the economic engine behind America's booming economy. Stop the tariffs, they reckon, and then the economy will fizzle out-- and Trump will become a spent force. It was a good plan. Too bad it failed.
Far from corporate media's simplistic analysis, this decision was a firewall, a machete, and two shields-- one for President Trump and one for the Court.
In its decision yesterday, the Nation's Highest Court seemed to hand progressives everything they'd hoped for. It clarified a badly worded trade statute called the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA-- the legal engine powering most of Trump's Tariff Dashboard.
Specifically, they noted that the word "tariff" does not appear anywhere in IEEPA.The majority mused that tariffs can't just be intuited from the loose statutory language...
The Supremes did not actually say Trump must shut down the Tariff Dashboard. Just the opposite. In fact, in a dissenting opinion that the President loved --Trump read parts of it aloud to reporters at an afternoon presser-- Justice Kavanaugh helpfully listed four other statutes Trump could use to keep the Dashboard humming:
Admittedly, IEEPA is simpler. Less convoluted. Those other statutes are trickier, slower, require more steps, and are subject to various rules and regulations. But that was probably the point, as we'll soon see.
Before the ink was dry on the press room briefings --90 minutes after the order issued-- Trump signed a new executive order replacing the IEEPA tariffs with Kavanaugh's suggested alternative statutes. For good measure, Trump used one of the alternatives to impose a temporary 10% across-the-board tariff placeholder, and still had a little time left over to squeeze out a quick Truth Social post only slightly longer than The Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire.
We will focus on a key moment from November's oral arguments that lifts the curtain, letting us see what's really happening behind the scenes. In paraphrase, at page 69 in the transcript, Justice Gorsuch asked, If we let THIS president use IEEPA for tariffs, what stops the NEXT president from declaring a climate emergency and taxing gas-powered pickup trucks out of existence?
Here's the thing: don't miss this. When Gorsuch asked him about the peril of future presidents, the DOJ's lawyer --Trump's lawyer-- agreed. If IEEPA allows Trump tariffing, then a future Democrat president could also use it, for whatever insane progressive agenda they felt like, just by declaring a "state of emergency." Nobody disputed that; everybody agreed.
When they stripped tariffs from IEEPA, Justices Gorsuch, Roberts, and Barrett weren't betraying Trump. They were protecting America from the next Democrat president --a Warren or Newsom-- declaring a climate emergency and using IEEPA to impose the Green New Deal by fiat.
So they built a firewall.
But the firewall was just the appetizer. Now behold the two shields and the machete.
The Shield for Trump. The three rock-ribbed conservatives, Thomas, Alito, and Kavanaugh, wrote spirited dissents pre-empting Democrats from complaining that Trump's use of IEEPA was 'totally illegal' and unconstitutional. In other words, three Justices made a forceful, substantive, unqualified case that the President did have tariff authority under IEEPA. Meaning, this was, at worst, a legitimate legal disagreement, and not any lawless power grab.
The Shield for the Court. The decision likewise provided SCOTUS cover for new political possibilities. Yesterday's jubilant headlines praised the Supreme Court's "independence," "grit," and "defiance." According to corporate media, SCOTUS just handed Trump a "devastating loss." And President Trump is earning an Oscar playing the wounded victim like nobody's business.
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent sang a completely different tune. "Our estimates show that the use of Section 122 authority, combined with potentially enhanced Section 232 and Section 301 tariffs," the Secretary calmly explained, "will result in virtually unchanged tariff revenue in 2026."
The Machete. The majority's legal reason for chopping out IEEPA's tariff power was actually another gift to conservatives-- a sharpened machete. Since 2022 or so, the Court has been sharpening a legal rule called the "Major Questions Doctrine" (MQD), which basically says the Executive Branch can't just 'read between the lines' or 'fill in the gaps' of statutes, even if they are badly written or ambiguous.
MQD is widely considered a revolutionary tool that could finally clear the ungovernable wilderness of the administrative state-- a goal conservatives have longed for since the FDR days.
Even sharper after yesterday's decision, MQD provides that if a statute doesn't say something, executive agencies like the EPA or CDC can't regulate into existence what are essentially new laws. For example, SCOTUS first used the muscular new version of Major Questions to strike down Biden's OSHA mandate forcing businesses with more than 100 employees to require the jabs.
Had yesterday's decision swung the other way, had SCOTUS let Trump extrapolate tariffs from IEEPA, it would have undermined the terrific MQD machete, which is one of the Roberts Court's most important restrictions on future Democrat presidents. After this decision, the MQD is even stronger. Swing away, boys. Chop, chop.
Over the next few months, the Court will make several seismic decisions:
-Birthright citizenship-- which could forever end birth tourism.
-Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act-- which could add up to 27 additional Republican House seats.
-Fed Independence and Firing of Agency Heads-- which could give President Trump de facto control of the Federal Reserve.
The reason progressives were more excited than a new puppy yesterday is that they correctly perceive that President Trump's tariffs are the economic engine behind America's booming economy. Stop the tariffs, they reckon, and then the economy will fizzle out-- and Trump will become a spent force. It was a good plan. Too bad it failed.
Far from corporate media's simplistic analysis, this decision was a firewall, a machete, and two shields-- one for President Trump and one for the Court.
In its decision yesterday, the Nation's Highest Court seemed to hand progressives everything they'd hoped for. It clarified a badly worded trade statute called the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA-- the legal engine powering most of Trump's Tariff Dashboard.
Specifically, they noted that the word "tariff" does not appear anywhere in IEEPA.The majority mused that tariffs can't just be intuited from the loose statutory language...
The Supremes did not actually say Trump must shut down the Tariff Dashboard. Just the opposite. In fact, in a dissenting opinion that the President loved --Trump read parts of it aloud to reporters at an afternoon presser-- Justice Kavanaugh helpfully listed four other statutes Trump could use to keep the Dashboard humming:
Admittedly, IEEPA is simpler. Less convoluted. Those other statutes are trickier, slower, require more steps, and are subject to various rules and regulations. But that was probably the point, as we'll soon see.
Before the ink was dry on the press room briefings --90 minutes after the order issued-- Trump signed a new executive order replacing the IEEPA tariffs with Kavanaugh's suggested alternative statutes. For good measure, Trump used one of the alternatives to impose a temporary 10% across-the-board tariff placeholder, and still had a little time left over to squeeze out a quick Truth Social post only slightly longer than The Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire.
We will focus on a key moment from November's oral arguments that lifts the curtain, letting us see what's really happening behind the scenes. In paraphrase, at page 69 in the transcript, Justice Gorsuch asked, If we let THIS president use IEEPA for tariffs, what stops the NEXT president from declaring a climate emergency and taxing gas-powered pickup trucks out of existence?
Here's the thing: don't miss this. When Gorsuch asked him about the peril of future presidents, the DOJ's lawyer --Trump's lawyer-- agreed. If IEEPA allows Trump tariffing, then a future Democrat president could also use it, for whatever insane progressive agenda they felt like, just by declaring a "state of emergency." Nobody disputed that; everybody agreed.
When they stripped tariffs from IEEPA, Justices Gorsuch, Roberts, and Barrett weren't betraying Trump. They were protecting America from the next Democrat president --a Warren or Newsom-- declaring a climate emergency and using IEEPA to impose the Green New Deal by fiat.
So they built a firewall.
But the firewall was just the appetizer. Now behold the two shields and the machete.
The Shield for Trump. The three rock-ribbed conservatives, Thomas, Alito, and Kavanaugh, wrote spirited dissents pre-empting Democrats from complaining that Trump's use of IEEPA was 'totally illegal' and unconstitutional. In other words, three Justices made a forceful, substantive, unqualified case that the President did have tariff authority under IEEPA. Meaning, this was, at worst, a legitimate legal disagreement, and not any lawless power grab.
The Shield for the Court. The decision likewise provided SCOTUS cover for new political possibilities. Yesterday's jubilant headlines praised the Supreme Court's "independence," "grit," and "defiance." According to corporate media, SCOTUS just handed Trump a "devastating loss." And President Trump is earning an Oscar playing the wounded victim like nobody's business.
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent sang a completely different tune. "Our estimates show that the use of Section 122 authority, combined with potentially enhanced Section 232 and Section 301 tariffs," the Secretary calmly explained, "will result in virtually unchanged tariff revenue in 2026."
The Machete. The majority's legal reason for chopping out IEEPA's tariff power was actually another gift to conservatives-- a sharpened machete. Since 2022 or so, the Court has been sharpening a legal rule called the "Major Questions Doctrine" (MQD), which basically says the Executive Branch can't just 'read between the lines' or 'fill in the gaps' of statutes, even if they are badly written or ambiguous.
MQD is widely considered a revolutionary tool that could finally clear the ungovernable wilderness of the administrative state-- a goal conservatives have longed for since the FDR days.
Even sharper after yesterday's decision, MQD provides that if a statute doesn't say something, executive agencies like the EPA or CDC can't regulate into existence what are essentially new laws. For example, SCOTUS first used the muscular new version of Major Questions to strike down Biden's OSHA mandate forcing businesses with more than 100 employees to require the jabs.
Had yesterday's decision swung the other way, had SCOTUS let Trump extrapolate tariffs from IEEPA, it would have undermined the terrific MQD machete, which is one of the Roberts Court's most important restrictions on future Democrat presidents. After this decision, the MQD is even stronger. Swing away, boys. Chop, chop.
Over the next few months, the Court will make several seismic decisions:
-Birthright citizenship-- which could forever end birth tourism.
-Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act-- which could add up to 27 additional Republican House seats.
-Fed Independence and Firing of Agency Heads-- which could give President Trump de facto control of the Federal Reserve.
Bessent said the quiet part out loud during an interview yesterday, and I'm not sure a lot of people caught it. He said that tariffs are a "melting ice cube", meaning that they don't (and shouldn't) help forever. They are a stop-gap to protect against foreign dumping (i.e. Korean steel, Chinese everything), and to help support the re-growth of U.S. manufacturing.
I don't think they'll go away completely, but some of the larger tariffs will go down.
Last night, the President took Trump Accounts for Kids and launched it into orbit. "Half of all working Americans still do not have access to a retirement plan with matching contributions from an employer," the President told Congress. That was the Democrats' argument. Then he pulled the pin from the political grenade.
"To remedy this gross disparity," he explained, "I am announcing that next year, my administration will give these often forgotten American workers, great people, the people that built our country, access to the same type of retirement plan offered to every federal worker. We will match your contribution with up to $1,000 each year, as we ensure that all Americans can profit from a rising stock market."
And just like that, the tables turned. Everyone is invested in the market now. (Or at least, can be, by simply checking a box on their income tax form. Citizenship and ID are required.) Federal workers already have retirement accounts linked to the market. Corporate workers get IRAs and 401Ks in which they can invest. Now every single child gets one and, if --and only if-- Republicans keep the House this November, every other person will get one too, plus $1,000 bucks to kick it off.
Axios added, "A White House official tells Axios that, like with Trump accounts for kids, philanthropic interests will be able to contribute." Meaning, non-profits can kick in, too.
Last night, the President took Trump Accounts for Kids and launched it into orbit. "Half of all working Americans still do not have access to a retirement plan with matching contributions from an employer," the President told Congress. That was the Democrats' argument. Then he pulled the pin from the political grenade.
"To remedy this gross disparity," he explained, "I am announcing that next year, my administration will give these often forgotten American workers, great people, the people that built our country, access to the same type of retirement plan offered to every federal worker. We will match your contribution with up to $1,000 each year, as we ensure that all Americans can profit from a rising stock market."
And just like that, the tables turned. Everyone is invested in the market now. (Or at least, can be, by simply checking a box on their income tax form. Citizenship and ID are required.) Federal workers already have retirement accounts linked to the market. Corporate workers get IRAs and 401Ks in which they can invest. Now every single child gets one and, if --and only if-- Republicans keep the House this November, every other person will get one too, plus $1,000 bucks to kick it off.
Axios added, "A White House official tells Axios that, like with Trump accounts for kids, philanthropic interests will be able to contribute." Meaning, non-profits can kick in, too.
We’ve gone over 10 days without an Epstein post! Unacceptable!
Here’s Jeff’s top physicists Amber and Kim learning how string theory can be used to get hotter babes for the DC elite .
1
