Stocks rose on Friday after the Supreme Court ruled against President Donald Trump’s tariffs, potentially providing relief for companies burdened by higher costs from the duties and easing concern about sticky inflation still plaguing the U.S. economy.

The S&P 500

advanced 0.69% and closed at 6,909.51, while the Nasdaq Composite

gained 0.9% and settled at 22,886.07. The Dow Jones Industrial Average

added 230.81 points, or 0.47%, and ended at 49,625.97. The 30-stock index recovered from a 200-point loss earlier in the session on disappointing economic data.

https://www.cnbc.com/2026/02/19/stock-market-today-live-updates.html

Whatever one might think of the significance of how the various stock markets perform, it's clear that Trump attaches great importance to it. And so do at least, some of the MAGA fans here, who cite the stock market's recent performance as a big plus for Trump. I wonder how he and they can manage to reconcile the apparent conflict.

S&P500 rises just 0.69% and haters use this to try attacking patriots for supporting the President? Serioudly, this is absolutely insane. A rise or fall like this is probably LESS than the average rise.

A better take would be US markets yawn and shrug off a deranged political decision by Supreme court. BTW the voters elected Trump to make important decisions not Ms I dobt know what a woman is DEI hire Ketanji Brown Jackson

Great to see the extra 10% revenge tariffs. Thats on you Jackson, Sotomayer and Roberts. Ahahaha epic backfire you clowns🤣

9 minutes ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

S&P500 rises just 0.69% and haters use this to try attacking patriots for supporting the President? Serioudly, this is absolutely insane. A rise or fall like this is probably LESS than the average rise.

A better take would be US markets yawn and shrug off a deranged political decision by Supreme court. BTW the voters elected Trump to make important decisions not Ms I dobt know what a woman is DEI hire Ketanji Brown Jackson

Great to see the extra 10% revenge tariffs. Thats on you Jackson, Sotomayer and Roberts. Ahahaha epic backfire you clowns🤣

This was a day that there was bad news for the economy in the 4th quarter. Despite that the stock indexes rose. It's not that I think that the indexes are really that significant. But it does go against the narrative of Trump supports who apparently that's the most important factor of the economy.

You might to look closer to home if it's derangement you're seeking. Most economist and jurists thought the basis for Trump's tariffs was suspect. If anyone is to be of intellectually deficient decistions, it's the 3 right wingers who supported Trump. They along with other conservatives created something called the major questions doctrines which says that extending a law in an unprecedented and major way is invalid. Funny that they invoked it for some of Biden's actions but when it came to this issue, it apparently evaporated.

As for your final comment, it's so confused as to defy explanation. What extra tariffs? On balance, tariffis declined. So "new" but not "extra". And why blame only Jackson, Sotomayer, and Roberts? Do you believe that only 3 Justices voted to overturn Trump's claim? Why omit Gorsuch, Browning, and Kagan?

2 hours ago, Alan Zweibel said:

I wonder how he and they can manage to reconcile the apparent conflict.

It's simple, they don't care.

In an article published on the latest issue of Foreign Affairs Trump's, Trump family's and his minions' interest is clearly spelled out. As for the MAGAs, they are so absorbed in their hatred of the Democrats that they don't care about anything else (and here we should congratulate the Democrats for having managed to trigger such strong sentiment in a large part of the American public).

"Trump has [...] wielded U.S. foreign policy principally to increase his own wealth, bolster his status, and personally benefit a small circle of his family members, friends, and loyalists. U.S. foreign policy is now largely subordinate to the private interests of the president and his retainers. These interests may, from time to time, align with some plausible understanding of the public good. Much more often, however, the Trump administration invokes U.S. national interests to deflect from its self-dealing by eroding the distinction between its private interests and those of the American people.".

"Many news reports on how Trump’s foreign dealmaking will line his supporters’ pockets still treat such arrangements as side payments, not as the main purpose of his statecraft. But if the administration’s foreign policy were not fundamentally kleptocratic, it would not be systematically attempting to subvert the independence of—or simply disable—the institutions that have long made U.S. foreign policy, including the National Security Council, the State Department, and the Defense Department."

"Such maneuvers have made room for a foreign policy run by a handful of the president’s friends and backers. Consider Trump’s de facto top diplomat, Steve Witkoff. [...] Trump chose Witkoff, a New York real estate baron with no government or diplomatic experience. What he did have was years of personal friendship with Trump, and for this president, that was credential enough. Trump dispatched Witkoff to negotiate with the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Iran, Hamas and Israel, and Russia and Ukraine—often by himself.

Trump’s other main envoys are also personal connections. He often sends his son-in-law Jared Kushner on diplomatic trips. He appointed Massad Boulos, his daughter Tiffany’s father-in-law, as senior adviser for Arab and African Affairs, senior adviser to the president on Arab and Middle Eastern Affairs, and senior adviser for Africa all at once [...]."

"The transactional bundles that the administration announced following Trump’s May 2025 tour of the Middle East illustrate this pattern. [...] Bundled with these arrangements are deals that obviously benefit Trump and his family personally. Last May, U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth revealed that Qatar had gifted a Boeing luxury jet to Trump, which will cost American taxpayers an estimated $1 billion to retrofit and which Trump intends to keep after he leaves office. The Trumps are part of brand-leasing agreements and a luxury golf resort connected to Qatari Diar, a real estate company backed by the country’s sovereign wealth fund. Alongside Washington’s official UAE deals, the Trump Organization has expanded its footprint in the sheikhdom through new real estate megaprojects; in April 2025, Trump’s son Eric announced plans for an 80-story Trump Tower in Dubai.

Witkoff’s deals similarly appear to blend national and personal interests. He shepherded an agreement to lift U.S. restrictions on the export of high-end semiconductors to a technology firm chaired by Sheikh Tahnoon bin Zayed Al Nahyan, the UAE’s national security adviser. U.S. officials had previously blocked such a sale, believing it would help China get its hands on the technology. At around the same time, MGX, an investment firm chaired by Tahnoon, bought $2 billion worth of stablecoin, a form of cryptocurrency, from World Liberty Financial, whose co-founders include Witkoff, his two sons, Trump, and Trump’s three sons."

1 hour ago, Alan Zweibel said:

As for your final comment, it's so confused as to defy explanation. What extra tariffs

"Furious Trump signs global 10% duty after supreme court issues tariff blow

President calls six justices a ‘disgrace to the nation’ while praising three justices who dissented"

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/feb/20/trump-tariff-scotus-response

Always happy to educate and inform.

14 minutes ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

"Furious Trump signs global 10% duty after supreme court issues tariff blow

President calls six justices a ‘disgrace to the nation’ while praising three justices who dissented"

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/feb/20/trump-tariff-scotus-response

Always happy to educate and inform.

As I asked before, how are they "extra"? They may be new but they are certainly not extra. And you still haven't explained why you only mentioned three justices for condemnation. And I see that you have absolutely nothing to contribute to the issue of the conservatives doctrine of "major questions" and how the justices who supported Trump seemed to ignore that. And, in fact, there was no reasoning at all in your condemnation of the 6 justices' decision. I will say that, unlike Trump, you don't seem to subscribe to the notion that the Supreme Court Justices whom Trump appointed, somehow owe him fealty.

4 hours ago, Alan Zweibel said:

Stocks rose on Friday after the Supreme Court ruled against President Donald Trump’s tariffs, potentially providing relief for companies burdened by higher costs from the duties and easing concern about sticky inflation still plaguing the U.S. economy.

The S&P 500

advanced 0.69% and closed at 6,909.51, while the Nasdaq Composite

gained 0.9% and settled at 22,886.07. The Dow Jones Industrial Average

added 230.81 points, or 0.47%, and ended at 49,625.97. The 30-stock index recovered from a 200-point loss earlier in the session on disappointing economic data.

https://www.cnbc.com/2026/02/19/stock-market-today-live-updates.html

Whatever one might think of the significance of how the various stock markets perform, it's clear that Trump attaches great importance to it. And so do at least, some of the MAGA fans here, who cite the stock market's recent performance as a big plus for Trump. I wonder how he and they can manage to reconcile the apparent conflict.

What conflict?