Free the People | Week in Review

The good...

Supreme Court rules Trump's tariffs illegal [Link]

Trump's "Liberation Day" tariff chart, April 2, 2025.

Over the past year, Donny 2-Dolls has declared unprecedented sweeping tariffs on the import of foreign goods into the United States of America. He made many false claims about these tariffs, including the claim that he had the authority to enact these tariffs without approval from Congress under the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). Essentially, Donald Trump said that global trade imbalances in which the United States imports more goods from a given country than it exports to that country, constituted a national emergency, and thus gave him the right to impose tariffs on those countries.

There's nothing nefarious or evil about the United States buying more goods from a certain country than we sell to that country. That's just the state of global business. While it may be in the best long-term interest of the United States to produce more than it consumes, enacting tariffs on imports—which are paid by the American companies that are importing these goods and passing the cost on to consumers—doesn't actually change that dynamic.

In a surprise ruling, the Supreme Court, which has been handing Trump unreasonably favorable rulings so far in his second term, declared Trump's invocation of the IEEPA to justify his tariffs to be unconstitutional.

The president asserts the extraordinary power to unilaterally impose tariffs of unlimited amount, duration, and scope. In light of the breadth, history, and constitutional context of that asserted authority, he must identify clear congressional authorization to exercise it.

Chief Justice John Roberts

What happens now? Well, Donny 2-Dolls is already looking for other legal loopholes that he can use to keep his tariffs in place. Meanwhile, wealthy corporations are suing the federal government, demanding they refund the money these companies paid out in tariffs. This process will likely take months, if not years, and it's highly unlikely consumers will see any significant price reductions on everyday purchases as a result of the dropped tariffs because the cost of acquiring or producing a good is not what ultimately determines the off-the-shelf price in a capitalist society.

The bad...

Investigation uncovers undisclosed ICE-stapo shooting of U.S. citizen in March, 2025 [Link]

Image by Mohamed Hassan from Pixabay.

The murder of Renee Good and Alex Pretti in 2026 have led to public outrage over the irresponsible levels of aggression displayed by ICE-stapo agents under the direction of Kristi Noem and Stephen Miller.

New records indicate that a similar incident occurred last year and was not disclosed by the agency. On March 15, 2025, an ICE agent fatally shot Ruben Martinez through the driver's-side window of his car. Like Jonathan Ross, who murdered Renee Good, this agent also claimed that he had been run over and fired on Martinez in self defense. While there does not appear to be video footage in this situation, testimony from an eyewitness in the passenger seat states that Martinez was not resisting, and the officer issued no warning, no commands, and did not give Martinez a chance to take any action before he was killed.

The similarity between this account and the killing of Renee Good is startling. And the fact that this information was deliberately withheld from the public for almost a year raises questions about what else the Department of Homeland Security is hiding from the public.

The ugly...

Trump drags United States into war with Iran [Link]

Explosion in Tehran, Iran, from joint US/Israel bombing.

The United States of America and Israel have launched joint attacks on Iran. Donny 2-Dolls claims that this is a "major combat operation" just like his hero Vladimir Putin called the Russian war against Ukraine a "special military operation." But calling it by another name doesn't change what it is. The Cambridge English Dictionary defines war as "armed fighting between two or more countries or groups."

Trump delivered a statement about the attacks, offering no real clear purpose or objective for the invasion. The United States and Iran have never been on particularly friendly terms, and Trump cited several conflicts between the two nations going back to the 1970s. So is this war a retaliation against ongoing hostilities between our countries? But then he said that Iran is a sponsor of global terror. So is that why we went to war with them? Then he talked about their nuclear weapons program and declared they should never be allowed to build nuclear weapons. Maybe that's why we're at war with Iran.

But several months ago, the United States bombed Iran and, according to Trump, completely destroyed their nuclear weapons program, ensuring they would never be able to build their own nukes. If that's true, why do we need to go to war with them over their "obliterated" nuclear capabilities? And that's despite the fact that the United States had already negotiated a nuclear accord with Iran over 10 years ago, with support from several other world powers that would ensure Iran would not build nuclear weapons. Trump terminated that agreement in his first term shortly before assassinating one of the top Iranian military commanders, leaving Iran free to pursue their nuclear program without restriction.

If the reason for the war with Iran is unclear, maybe the objectives of the war will offer some clarity:

We're going to destroy their missiles and raze their missile industry to the ground. It will be totally again obliterated. We're going to annihilate their navy. We're going to ensure that the region's terrorist proxies can no longer destabilise the region or the world and attack our forces, and no longer use their IEDs, or roadside bombs as they are sometimes called, to so gravely wound and kill thousands and thousands of people, including many Americans. And we will ensure that Iran does not obtain a nuclear weapon.

Donny 2-Dolls, Acting President of Venezuela

So, our objective is apparently to ^1. raze their missile industry to the ground, ^2. annihilate their navy, ^3. ensure that their proxies can't destabilize the region, ^4. prevent them from ever using IEDs, AND ^5. ensure they do not obtain a nuclear weapon. In reality, only that last objective is even remotely achievable, and it would take a long and costly war to even have a chance of achieving it. The rest is simply too vague to ever be achieved, no matter how long we fight or how many people are killed on both sides.

What's far more likely is that Trump will continue to use the United States Armed Forces to kill Iranians until Iran hands over control of its natural resources (oil) and/or makes a substantial contribution to Trump's personal finances. When that happens, Trump will declare victory, falsely stating that Iran has been completely obliterated and all of our objectives have been achieved, and then withdraw our troops temporarily while he goes for a swim in his money vault like Scrooge McDuck.