President Trump offered a harsh, critical, even sarcastic response to the Supreme Court’s decision that he overstepped his authority to impose tariffs at a White House press conference on Friday. He frames the case as politically motivated and says the dissent clarifies his power to impose tariffs by other means, which he is doing immediately: imposing a 10% global tariff using a different legislative authority. “The Supreme Court’s ruling on tariffs is deeply disappointing, and I am ashamed of certain members of the court,” Trump said. “When you read the dissenting opinions, there is no way anyone can argue against them. Foreign countries who have been ripping us off for years are ecstatic. They’re so happy, they’re dancing in the streets — but they won’t be dancing for long.” “The Democrats on the court are thrilled; they’re an automatic no, just like in Congress. They’re against anything that makes America strong, healthy, and great again. They are, frankly, a disgrace to our nation,” Trump said. “I understand how they’re very easily swayed. I wanted to be a good boy,” Trump said about the tariffs he imposed. “But now the court has given me the unquestioned right to ban all sorts of things from coming into our country – to destroy foreign countries – but a much more powerful right than many people ever thought we even had. But not the right to charge a fee. How crazy is that?” “I can embargo, but I can’t charge one dollar,” Trump said about the decision. “I’m allowed to destroy the country, but I can’t do a little fee.” “Today I will sign an order to impose a 10% global tariff,” he said. Here’s a full transcript of his opening remarks:

PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: Wow, that’s a lot of people. That’s a new record. We set a record every time. Well, thank you very much for being here. The Supreme Court’s ruling on tariffs is deeply disappointing. And I’m ashamed of certain members of the court – absolutely ashamed – for not having the courage to do what’s right for our country. I’d like to thank and congratulate Justices Thomas, Alito, and Kavanaugh for their strength and wisdom and love of our country, which is right now very proud of those justices. When you read the dissenting opinions, there’s no way that anyone can argue against them. There’s no way. Foreign countries that have been ripping us off for years are ecstatic. They’re so happy, and they’re dancing in the streets – but they won’t be dancing for long, that I can assure you. The Democrats on the court are thrilled, but they will automatically vote no. They’re an automatic no, just like in Congress – they’re an automatic no. They’re against anything that makes America strong, healthy, and great again. They also are, frankly, a disgrace to our nation, those justices. They’re an automatic no – no matter how good a case you have, it’s a no. But you can’t knock their loyalty. It’s one thing you can do. With some of our people, others think they’re being politically correct, which has happened before far too often with certain members of this court, and it’s happened so often with this court. What a shame. Having to do with voting in particular. When in fact they’re just being fools and lapdogs for the RINOs and the radical left Democrats – not that they should have anything at all to do with it. They’re very unpatriotic and disloyal to our Constitution. It’s my opinion that the court has been swayed by foreign interests and a political movement that is far smaller than people would ever think. It’s a small movement. I won by millions of votes. We won in a landslide. With all the cheating that went on – there was a lot of it – but we still won in a landslide, too big to rig. But these people are obnoxious, ignorant, and loud. They’re very loud, and I think certain justices are afraid of that. They don’t want to do the right thing. They’re afraid of it. This was an important case to me, more as a symbol of economic national security. And also, I would say, just for our country itself – so important. Because we’re doing so well as a country. We’ve never done so well. The good news is that there are methods, practices, statutes, and authorities – as recognized by the entire court in this terrible decision, and also as recognized by Congress, which they refer to – that are even stronger than the IEEPA tariffs available to me as President of the United States. In actuality, I was very modest in my ask of other countries and businesses because I wanted to be very well behaved. I didn’t want to do anything that would affect the decision of the court, because I understand the court. I understand how they’re very easily swayed. I want to be a good boy. I have very effectively utilized tariffs over the past year to make America great again. Our stock market has just recently broken 50,000 on the Dow and simultaneously – and even more amazingly – broken 7,000 on the S&P, two numbers that everybody thought upon our landslide election victory could not be attained. Think of that. Nobody thought it was possible to do it within four years, and we did it in one year. They said you’ll never be able – you go back and you read the geniuses, read their statements, all of the Nobel Prize winners in economics – they said no, you couldn’t do it in four years. Well, we didn’t do it in four years, we did it in one year. We broke every record in the book, and we’re continuing to do so. Tariffs have likewise been used to end five of the eight wars that I settled. I settled eight wars, whether you like it or not – including India, Pakistan, big ones, nuclear, could have been nuclear. The prime minister of Pakistan said yesterday at the great meeting that we had – the Peace Board – he said yesterday that President Trump could have saved 35 million lives by getting us to stop fighting. They were getting ready to do some bad things. But these tariffs have given us great national security and, together with our strong borders, reduced fentanyl coming into our country by 30% when I use them as a penalty against countries illegally sending this poison into our country to poison our youth. All of those tariffs remain. They all remain. I don’t know if you know that or not – they all remain. We’re still getting them, and we will after the decision. I guess there’s nobody left to appeal to, but again, those three people – such respect. I’ve had a lot of respect for them anyway, but such great respect. Other alternatives will now be used to replace the ones that the court incorrectly rejected. We have alternatives – great alternatives. Could be more money. We’ll take in more money, and we’ll be a lot stronger for it. We’re taking in hundreds of billions of dollars. We’ll continue to do so. To show you how ridiculous the opinion is, however, the court said that I’m not allowed to charge even $ 1. I can’t charge $ 1 – can’t charge a dollar. I would’ve used one penny, but we don’t make pennies anymore – we save money. Can’t charge $ 1 to any country under IEEPA – not $ 1. I assume to protect other countries. This must have been done to protect those other countries – certainly not the United States of America, which they should be interested in protecting. That’s what they’re supposed to be protecting. But I am allowed to cut off any and all trade or business with that same country. In other words, I can destroy the trade. I can destroy the country. I’m even allowed to impose a foreign-country-destroying embargo. I can embargo. I can do anything I want, but I can’t charge $ 1. Because that’s not what it says, and that’s not the way it even reads. I can do anything I want to do to them, but I can’t charge any money. So I’m allowed to destroy the country, but I can’t charge them a little fee. I could give them a little 22 cents fee, but I cannot charge – under any circumstances – I cannot charge them anything. Think of that. How ridiculous is that? I’m allowed to embargo them. I’m allowed to tell them, “You can’t do business in the United States anymore. We want you out of here.” But if I want to charge them $ 10, I can’t do that. It’s incorrect. Their decision is incorrect. But it doesn’t matter because we have very powerful alternatives that have been approved by this decision. For those that thought they had us – they’re saying that I have the absolute right to license, but not the right to charge a license fee. So think of that. I have the right to license – it’s a very powerful word. In many ways, license is more powerful than tariffs. In fact, I was thinking about using it. But they came up with the idea that I can license – just like the people that were opposing me told them to do – but not the right to charge a license fee. Think of that. Who ever heard of such a thing? What license has ever been issued without the right to charge a fee? You get a license, you charge a fee. It’s automatic – but not with this court. But now the court has given me the unquestioned right to ban all sorts of things from coming into our country – to destroy foreign countries – but a much more powerful right than many people ever thought we even had. But not the right to charge a fee. How crazy is that? Our country is the hottest country anywhere in the world right now. And it was a dead country 1.5 years ago under an incompetent president. But now I’m going to go in a different direction – probably the direction that I should have gone the first time. I read the language – I’m very good at reading language – and it read our way 100%. But now I’ll go the way I could have gone originally, which is even stronger than our original choice. As Justice Kavanaugh – who stuck to his guns, so you have to see – I’m so proud of him – wrote in his dissent: “Although I firmly disagree with the court’s holding today, the decision might not substantially constrain the president’s ability to order tariffs going forward.” So think of that – the decision might not substantially constrain. And it doesn’t. He’s right. In fact, I can charge much more than I was charging. “That’s because numerous other federal statutes authorize the president to impose tariffs and might justify most, if not all, of the tariffs issued in this case – even more tariffs, actually.” Those statutes include, for example, the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, Section 232; the Trade Act of 1974, Sections 122 and 301; and the Tariff Act of 1930, Section 338. All clear. But it’s a little bit longer process. I thought I’d make things simple, but they didn’t let us do that. I would like to thank Justice Kavanaugh for his genius and his great ability. Very proud of that appointment. In actuality, while I am sure that they did not mean to do so, the Supreme Court’s decision today made a president’s ability to both regulate trade and impose tariffs more powerful and more crystal clear rather than less. I don’t think they meant that. I’m sure they didn’t. It’s terrible. And to think that the Democrats who oppose this only because they want to go the opposite way – they’d like to pack the court. They want to put on 21 people. They want to pack the court. Maybe they should do it. Maybe they would be better off if they did it. There will no longer be any doubt. The income coming in and the protection of our companies and country will actually increase because of this decision. I don’t think the court meant that, but it’s the way it is based on long-standing law and hundreds – even thousands – of victories over the years. To the contrary, the Supreme Court did not overrule tariffs. They merely overruled a particular use of IEEPA tariffs – essentially to use it to get a fee. I can do anything I want with IEEPA – anything. I just can’t charge anybody for it. I can license, I just can’t charge them. It’s ridiculous, but it’s okay because we have other ways – numerous other ways. The ability to block, embargo, restrict, license, or impose any other condition on a foreign country’s ability to conduct trade with the United States under IEEPA has been fully confirmed by this decision. So now there’s no doubt – because there were a lot of questions about tariffs, because no president was smart enough to use them to protect our country from those countries and businesses that were ripping us off. You take a look at the deficits that we had with some of these countries – it was disgraceful what they got away with for many decades. But now we know – because this decision affirms all those things that some people weren’t sure about – that in order to protect our country, a president can actually charge more tariffs than I was charging in the past under the various tariff authorities. So we can use other statutes, other tariff authorities, which have also been confirmed and are fully allowed. Therefore, effective immediately, all national security tariffs under Section 232 and existing Section 301 tariffs remain in place – fully in place and in full force and effect. Today I will sign an order to impose a 10% global tariff under Section 122 over and above our normal tariffs already being charged. And we’re also initiating several Section 301 and other investigations to protect our country from unfair trading practices of other countries and companies. Thank you for your attention to this matter. And I say quite simply – which I’ve said for a long time – make America great again. And interestingly, we’ve already made it great, so I don’t have to use that, but I don’t think we’ll ever give up on MAGA. MAGA is always going to be with us. If you have a few questions, you can let us know. But just to end: we’re going forward. We will be able to take in more money, and there’ll no longer be doubt – because there was always doubt. I know the people that brought the lawsuit, and they’re sleazebags – major sleazebags – but I know them, and they’re foreign-country-centric. They were sending things into our country, and the people representing them knew full well that they were beneficial to other countries but very, very bad for us. And I stopped it – and we’ll just keep it going. So we have a totally firm decision now. And I don’t think the court meant it, because the court doesn’t show great spirit toward our country, in my opinion. A lot of bad decisions – but there are usually ways around it. This is something we could have done, as Justice Kavanaugh said. We could have done this originally, but we’re doing it now. And the numbers could be far greater than the hundreds of billions we’ve already taken in.

RealClearPolitics Videos