The U.S. Supreme Court is set to make a critical ruling on January 9th (Friday) Eastern Time, directly impacting the legality of the Trump administration's "Global Tariff Parity" policy. This involves not only over $200 billion in real money but could also redefine the boundaries of presidential trade authority in the United States.



Reviewing the entire event timeline: In April of this year, the Trump administration invoked the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to impose tariffs ranging from 10% to 40% on certain goods, which has so far generated over $200 billion in federal revenue. However, lower courts have deemed this action overstepped boundaries, with the case ascending through appeals all the way to the Supreme Court.

The market is currently mainly focused on three possible rulings. The first is a compromise— the court rules that tariffs based on trade deficits exceed authority but retains tariffs on a few goods related to national security; the second is full support— the policy is entirely legal, significantly strengthening the White House's trade legislative power; the third is a complete government defeat, with the tariffs policy being directly overturned.

According to data from the prediction market Polymarket, investor sentiment is quite clear— currently, the market is betting that the Supreme Court will rule against the Trump administration with a probability exceeding 75%. Interestingly, even if found illegal, the White House is not willing to take a risk without certainty. Economic Advisor Hasset has already indicated that alternative measures such as the "Section 301" tariffs can continue to exert pressure. Even if tariffs are ultimately repealed, complex administrative procedures could delay the process. The outcome of this "ultimate judgment" may just be the beginning; the real game has only just started.
View Original
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
  • Reward
  • 10
  • Repost
  • Share
Comment
0/400
BlockDetectivevip
· 01-07 23:02
Wow, this 200 billion is gone just like that. The White House still has tricks up its sleeve, playing this game smoothly.
View OriginalReply0
MoonRocketTeamvip
· 01-07 18:24
Damn, with a 75% chance of losing this round, it feels like the control room already calculated everything before the countdown... But on the other hand, the 301 clause is quite a tough card to play. The White House is really determined to go with a "delay tactic."
View OriginalReply0
SchrodingerAirdropvip
· 01-07 12:28
$200 billion can be gone in an instant, and there are still many ways to play with it.
View OriginalReply0
AlphaWhisperervip
· 01-07 03:53
There's a 75% chance they're willing to bet, I really think the market has gone crazy with gambling. To put it simply, this guy just has a backup plan; losing one round doesn't mean the game is over.
View OriginalReply0
MeltdownSurvivalistvip
· 01-07 03:53
75% chance of losing the case? Forget it, these judges will ultimately have to compromise. The White House has plenty of backup plans.
View OriginalReply0
NeonCollectorvip
· 01-07 03:53
200 billion USD playing the "legal boundary" game, what a good show This guy definitely has N tricks up his sleeve, such as Article 301, administrative process delays... with this combination, court rulings might just be the beginning The market is betting on a 75% chance of losing, but I’m actually a bit worried... what if the Supreme Court suddenly comes up with a compromise plan Wait, those who bought hedging orders early should be laughing now Tariffs ultimately come down to the issue of power boundaries. This year's decision could rewrite the trade landscape for the next decade Just looking at the compromise plan is enough to be tense; we all know how relaxed national security reasons can be This kind of recursive legal litigation, the real victims are the wallets of ordinary consumers...
View OriginalReply0
OnChainSleuthvip
· 01-07 03:48
200 billion just gone like that? With such a high chance of losing in court, how dare you keep doing this?
View OriginalReply0
retroactive_airdropvip
· 01-07 03:47
75% chance of losing? Alright, anyway, there's the 301 clause as a safety net in the end. This combo punch is played really skillfully.
View OriginalReply0
unrekt.ethvip
· 01-07 03:45
Don't chill, this Friday is the real casino moment. 200 billion dollars just disappears like that?
View OriginalReply0
GateUser-beba108dvip
· 01-07 03:29
200 billion USD just disappeared? Now this is interesting. I really want to see how the Supreme Court rules.
View OriginalReply0
View More
  • Pin

Trade Crypto Anywhere Anytime
qrCode
Scan to download Gate App
Community
  • 简体中文
  • English
  • Tiếng Việt
  • 繁體中文
  • Español
  • Русский
  • Français (Afrique)
  • Português (Portugal)
  • Bahasa Indonesia
  • 日本語
  • بالعربية
  • Українська
  • Português (Brasil)