Comments from Trump and what he’s hinting at:

“Proud of the justices that voted in favour” and “no way anyone can argue with those who dissented”

The dissent was Kavanaugh, joined by Thomas and Alito. Kavanaugh’s dissent argued for a foreign affairs exception to the major questions doctrine and read IEEPA’s text more broadly. The vote was 6-3 against tariffs.

Says he thinks court has been swayed by foreign interests

This is the most inflammatory statement and the most concerning from a rule-of-law perspective. The suggestion that six Supreme Court Justices — including three Republican appointees — ruled against the administration because of foreign influence is a serious allegation without any evident basis.

Says there are methods that are even stronger that are available to him”

He’s signaling that the administration intends to move aggressively on alternative authorities. The word “even stronger” suggests he may be looking beyond the conventional options like Section 232 and 301 — possibly Section 338, which allows tariffs up to 50% without a formal investigation requirement, or perhaps something more creative.

I will go in a stronger direction now.

He cited the 1974 trade act which includes Section 122, 201 and 301.

Other comments:

• I am allowed to impose an embargo but I can’t charge any money
• I am allowed to cut off all trade with a country

There is nothing surprising here.