President Trump appears ready to strike back following one of the most significant legal setbacks of his presidency.

As The Gateway Pundit reported, the US Supreme Court on Friday struck down President Trump’s tariffs in a 6-3 decision. The Court said Trump lacks the authority to impose the tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA).

Chief Justices Roberts, Amy Coney Barrett, and Neil Gorsuch sided with the three leftist justices. Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas, and Brett Kavanaugh dissented.

Justice Roberts wrote the majority opinion, which states in part:

It is also telling that in IEEPA’s half-century of existence, no President has invoked the statute to impose any tariffs, let alone tariffs of this magnitude and scope.

Accordingly, the President must ‘point to clear congressional authorization’ to justify his extraordinary assertion of that power. He cannot.

With this ruling, the US may now be forced to pay back at least $150 billion, though no guidance on how to do so was provided. What a mess.

But there is a silver lining for Trump: Some tariffs remain in place. These include those on steel and aluminum, which were based on national security concerns.

This means Trump could reimpose the tariffs struck down under different legal authorities, making any celebration by the globalists short-lived.

Indeed, this is a point that highly respected legal expert Jonathan Turley made on Fox News.

JUST IN: Legal expert Jonathan Turley confirms Trump has a MASSIVE TOOLBOX of additional tariff options, the 6-3 SCOTUS ruling is NOT the end of the road

“The admin has other tools…it can impose tariffs under other statutes.”

MAKE IT HAPPEN!pic.twitter.com/WwjQD62kO3

— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) February 20, 2026

Trump responded to the ruling a short time afterward, calling it a “disgrace.”

He also revealed that he had a backup plan to respond.

News: President Trump commented on the Supreme Court ruling striking down his tariffs while inside the White House breakfast with governors this morning, calling it a “disgrace,” I’m told. He told those gathered that he has a backup plan.

— Kaitlan Collins (@kaitlancollins) February 20, 2026

President Trump called the tariff ruling a “disgrace” and he has a backup plan, he said during this morning’s meeting with governors, sources told @aaronlarnavarro and @saraecook https://t.co/7U6sNgUtqU

— Jennifer Jacobs (@JenniferJJacobs) February 20, 2026

The post President Trump Responds After U.S. Supreme Court Strikes Down His Tariffs appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Mayor Zohran Mamdani is already short of funds for his socialist dream for New York City. Like a true communist, his plan is to increase taxes on homeowners while raiding retirement and healthcare funds. Ironically, communists are supposed to support the working man, but in reality, they support the non-working man who needs more money from the working man to keep from having to work.

On February 17, 2026, Mayor Mamdani presented his first preliminary budget and framed the city’s finances as a choice between two paths. He delivered an ultimatum to Governor Kathy Hochul and the state legislature: approve higher taxes on the wealthy or he would use the limited tools under his direct control to close a projected $5.4 billion shortfall.

His preferred path calls on Albany to raise personal income taxes by 2 percent on New Yorkers earning over $1 million and to increase corporate taxes on the most profitable companies. If the state refuses, he says he will pursue what he describes as a last resort: a 9.5 percent property tax hike, the first major increase in more than 20 years, affecting roughly 3 million residential units, along with drawing down approximately $1.2 billion from the city’s reserves, including the Rainy Day Fund and retiree health benefit trusts.

The proposal to tap retirement-related funds has generated the strongest backlash. Mamdani’s plan includes taking $229 million from the Retiree Health Benefits Trust, which pays health insurance premiums for retired city workers such as teachers, police officers, and sanitation workers.

Using money set aside for future medical costs to cover today’s operating deficit shifts long-term obligations into the current budget cycle. Budget watchdogs, including the Citizens Budget Commission, warn this would leave the city less prepared to meet healthcare costs for an aging workforce.

Mamdani insists he does not want to touch these funds and describes this as a harmful path he hopes to avoid. He is using the threat to pressure Governor Hochul into approving higher taxes on the wealthy.

Mamdani has also pushed to shift city pension investments away from what he calls harmful industries, including certain fossil fuel companies and firms tied to the conflict in Gaza. Pension trustees and union leaders argue this amounts to political intrusion into retirement assets and conflicts with their fiduciary duty to maximize returns for retirees.

By law, trustees must focus solely on financial performance. Critics contend that divesting from high-performing sectors for ideological reasons narrows the investment pool and can reduce long-term returns. Analysts noted that the Tel Aviv Stock Exchange significantly outperformed the S&P 500 in 2025.

Avoiding such assets means forfeiting gains that help keep pension funds solvent. Even a one or two percent underperformance compounded over time could create substantial funding gaps.

The dispute has escalated into a showdown with New York City Comptroller Mark Levine, the legal custodian of the pension funds. Levine recently announced plans to resume investing in Israel Bonds, calling them a long-term, secure investment that has never missed a payment in 80 years. Mamdani opposes the move, arguing the city should not support a foreign government involved in the Gaza conflict.

However, the mayor does not control the pension boards outright. The comptroller and union representatives hold significant seats, limiting Mamdani’s ability to force divestment. Critics say he is attempting to pressure the boards into adopting his position.

Governor Hochul has called the property tax hike unnecessary and continues to oppose raising state-level taxes on high earners. City Council Speaker Julie Menin labeled the proposal a non-starter, arguing the city should not balance its budget on the backs of working-class homeowners already struggling with affordability.

Labor unions are also raising alarms. Leaders from groups such as TWU Local 106 warn that if the city begins drawing from retiree healthcare funds to support current spending, it sets a dangerous precedent. Their argument is simple: if officials dip into healthcare trusts today, what prevents them from targeting pension checks tomorrow?

Critics further argue that New York already has the highest combined state and local income tax rate in the country and warn that additional increases could accelerate the migration of businesses and high earners to states such as Florida and Texas. Recent data show significant outflows of residents, income, and employers.

Opponents contend the core problem is rising spending, including pension and benefit obligations, not a lack of tax revenue.

This shortfall and heated debate do not even begin to address the long list of freebies Mamdani promised during his campaign. Funding proposals such as state-owned grocery stores and free buses would require even higher taxes. Raising taxes further, critics argue, is never the best way to help the working man.

The post New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani Raiding Retirement and Health Funds appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

The Supreme Court has struck down President Trump’s boldest efforts to secure our borders and rebuild the American middle class.

Led by Chief Justice John Roberts, who once again sided with the liberal wing and a handful of “major questions” obsessives, the Court ruled that the President does NOT have the authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose tariffs on foreign nations that are flooding our streets with drugs and hollowing out our factories.

Three lone voices of sanity, Justices Kavanaugh, Thomas, and Alito, issued a blistering dissent, warning that this decision creates a “mess” of biblical proportions for the U.S. Treasury and leaves our national security vulnerable to foreign threats.

These justices called out the decision as a dangerous power grab by the judiciary, ignoring historical precedents and the clear intent of Congress to empower the President in times of emergency.

President Trump, shortly after reclaiming the White House in 2025, declared national emergencies over the “public health crisis” caused by illegal drugs pouring in from Canada, Mexico, and China, and the “hollowing out” of American manufacturing due to massive trade deficits.

Using IEEPA, a law passed in 1977 to give presidents tools to fight foreign threats, he slapped tariffs on imports: 25% on most Canadian and Mexican goods, 10% on Chinese products for the drug war, and at least 10% on ALL imports from trading partners to fix the trade imbalance.

Small businesses and deep-state allies sued, and today the Court sided with them, claiming IEEPA’s language to “regulate… importation” doesn’t include tariffs because it’s not “clear congressional authorization.”

Roberts, joined by the usual suspects (Sotomayor, Kagan, Jackson) and turncoat Barrett and Gorsuch, invoked the so-called “major questions doctrine” to block Trump’s America-First agenda.

They argued tariffs are a “taxing power” reserved for Congress, ignoring that emergencies demand swift action from the Commander-in-Chief.

Justice Samuel Alito didn’t write separately but joined Kavanaugh’s dissent in full, signaling his full-throated agreement that this ruling is a dangerous overstep.

Alito, known for his no-nonsense defense of executive authority in national security matters, clearly sees this as another liberal power grab that weakens America’s defenses.

Key Quotes from Justice Kavanaugh (Joined by Thomas and Alito)

Justice Kavanaugh’s dissent focused on the statutory text and the historical understanding of the President’s role in foreign affairs:

• On Statutory Authority: “In light of the statutory text, longstanding historical practice, and relevant Supreme Court precedents, I would conclude that IEEPA authorizes the President to ‘regulate . . . importation’ by imposing tariffs on foreign imports during declared national emergencies”.

• On the Majority’s Reasoning: “The Court’s decision today cannot be justified as a matter of statutory interpretation”.

• On the Major Questions Doctrine: “What is new and rather extraordinary is the approach embodied in THE CHIEF JUSTICE’s opinion for three Justices, which would extend the major questions doctrine into the foreign affairs realm for the first time”.

• On Practical Consequences: “The United States may be required to refund billions of dollars to importers who paid the IEEPA tariffs… the refund process is likely to be a ‘mess’” .

• On Global Uncertainty: “Because IEEPA tariffs have helped facilitate trade deals worth trillions of dollars—including with foreign nations from China to the United Kingdom to Japan… the Court’s decision could generate uncertainty regarding various trade agreements.”

Key Quotes from Justice Thomas’s Separate Dissent

Justice Thomas went further in his separate opinion, arguing that the “core legislative power” was not at stake because importing is not a “core private right”:

• On the Nature of Importing: “Importing is a matter of privilege” and “A person had no core private right to import goods at the founding”.

• On the Nondelegation Doctrine: “the nondelegation doctrine does not apply to ‘a delegation of power to make rules governing private conduct in the area of foreign trade,’ including rules imposing duties on imports”.

• On Separation of Powers: “Therefore, to the extent that the Court relies on ‘“separation of powers principles”’ to rule against the President… it is mistaken”.

• On Historical Precedent: “Early Congresses often delegated to the President power to regulate foreign commerce, including through duties on imports”.

More from Thomas via Eric Daugherty:

“NEITHER the statutory text nor the Constitution provide a basis for ruling against the President.”

“Congress authorized the President to “regulate . . . importation.” Throughout American history, the authority to “regulate importation” has been understood to include the authority to impose duties on imports.”

“The meaning of that phrase was beyond doubt by the time that Congress enacted this statute, shortly after President Nixon’s highly publicized duties on imports were UPHELD based on identical language.”

“The statute that the President relied on therefore authorized him to impose the duties on imports at issue in these cases.”

“Because the Constitution assigns Congress many powers that do not implicate the nondelegation doctrine, Congress may delegate the exercise of many powers to the President.”

“Congress has done so repeatedly since the founding, WITH THIS COURT’S BLESSING.”

Read the ruling below:

Skip to PDF content

The post Three Justices WARN Majority Is Handcuffing President Trump’s Ability to Fight Foreign Threats — Here’s What the Three Justices Said in Their Dissent appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

A suspended sentence and a fine for a series of deadly mistakes.

On January 19, 2025, Thomas Plamberger and Kerstin Gurtner set out to climb the Grossglockner, Austria’s highest peak, and it ended in tragedy – with Gurtner dead and Plamberger now convicted of manslaughter for her death.

When Gertner collapsed sick near the top of the mountain, Plamberger left her alone to fetch help – but she froze to death before he could return.

The German justice system does not publicize the full names of people involved in trial cases, but by now their names and faces have been splashed in the press and on social media for a whole year, so it seems silly not to name them.

Austrian climber who left his girlfriend to freeze in the mountains receives a suspended sentence & fined €9,600

37y.o. Thomas Plamberger was found guilty of negligent manslaughter & sentenced to 5 months in prison, pending an appeal

Despite claiming he went for help, he… pic.twitter.com/zZbqwOqdj8

— Lord Bebo (@MyLordBebo) February 20, 2026

Deutsche Welle reported:

“The court in the Austrian city of Innsbruck gave Thomas P. a five-month suspended sentence on Thursday and fined him €9,400 ($11,100) for gross negligence. The case is unusual because while climbing accidents are common, prosecutions over them are rare.”

Bloody hell. She was the second girlfriend he abandoned on that mountain.

“An ex-girlfriend testified that she also climbed the Großglockner with Thomas P in 2023. She said he had abandoned her on the route at night after her head torch ran out of battery leaving her distressed” pic.twitter.com/0slVL3PKVk

— Darren Johnson (@DarrenJohnson66) February 20, 2026

The court heard how the couple fell behind in their schedule, and then Gurtner became exhausted and was unable to proceed, some 54 yards beneath the summit.

Plamberger left her alone to find help, and she froze to death in bad weather.

Prosecutors detailed the series of serious mistakes committed by the experienced climber.

“The woman was exposed to strong winds, and he hadn’t wrapped her in an emergency blanket or bivouac bag, which she had in her backpack. When asked why he had failed to do that, he told the court the situation had been particularly stressful.

In a call to mountain police, Thomas P. also didn’t make clear that the couple needed rescuing, the court said. He then failed to answer return calls or messages asking if help was needed, police said.

The 37-year-old defendant said his phone had been on airplane mode in order to save battery power.”

Daily Mail reported:

“Following the guilty verdict, Plamberger has been sentenced to five months’ imprisonment, suspended for three years, and handed a fine of €9,600 (£8,400). 

Passing the sentence, Trial Judge Norbert Hofer said: ‘The impression I have got from these proceedings is that this was a case of leaving at any cost.

‘You are an excellent mountaineer but Kerstin’s abilities were galaxies away. She lacked winter experience. But you definitely should have turned back and you should have realized that’.”

Read more:

‘It’s a Witch Hunt’: Mother of Woman Dead in Austria’s Highest Peak Defends Daughter’s Boyfriend Charged With Leaving Her To Die

The post 39-Year-Old Climber Found Guilty of Manslaughter for Leaving Girlfriend To Freeze to Death on Austria’s Highest Peak appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

The post Her Father Escaped China After Tiananmen Square, Now American Alysa Liu, Wins Women’s Skating Olympic Gold Medal appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.