Costco filed a lawsuit against the federal government for tariff expenses last year. So yeah they are already going down that path.

---

Literally 100%. They’re just going to say they’ve found an alternative legal path to enacting the tariffs.

---

Also clears the path for rate cuts, Powell said they likely would have had more by now without tariffs

---

https://preview.redd.it/qjgy0m9xvnkg1.jpeg?width=1280&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=26da0f0ce4a46dcf399a7470100145ddda5aaff8 New career path unlocked

---

Lol “The Federal government shutdown clearly sent the economy careening off its strong growth path in the fourth quarter which is a one-off that won’t be repeated in early 2026,” said Chris Rupkey, chief economist at Fwdbonds Aren't we currently shutdown again 😂

---

Inflation being up is the part that makes no sense... unless you realize that it's a lagging indicator in an economy like ours.... where people save and likely have some ability to absorb price increases. I'd say we should watch PPI VERY closely this quarter, it will tell us where we are headed. Pricing in an economy this big is a bit slower to change, but the signs are now there that we are in trouble. Also add consumer sentiment to the list of key things to follow closer now... do people actually WANT to keep spending money... GDP is telling you, likely not. Just take a while for it all to work through the entire list of econ indicators. So the path forward is pretty clear.... either produce less (lower GDP growth) and charge around the same (nearly constant inflation numbers) both of which means stagnant job growth.... OR produce more to keep GDP running, charge less for said goods (deflation) and hire fewer folks (lower jobs or literal negative job numbers). Either scenario is a much more difficult thing to solve than inflation.

---

I asked GPT yesterday... Correct. The market is pricing this as **moderate event risk**, not a shock event. Here is the precise read. # What the “-1% to +2%” actually means The JPMorgan scenario analysis you saw implies: * Downside case: about -1% on the S&P 500 * Upside case: about +2% * Most likely realized move: somewhere inside that band Translation: * This is **not priced like CPI, FOMC, or a crisis event** * It is treated as a **policy headline with limited macro impact** In volatility terms, this is relatively tame. # Why implied volatility is not huge The market is calm for structural reasons: # 1. Tariffs are already partially priced in Markets have lived with tariff noise for years. Investors believe: * Even if struck down → administration finds workaround * Even if upheld → status quo continues So the **long-term economic path barely changes**. # 2. The ruling is unlikely to change growth immediately Compare to true high-vol events: High impact events: * Fed surprise * Banking stress * War escalation * Inflation shock This tariff case is viewed as: * legal reshuffling * not an immediate demand shock * not a financial system risk Hence muted pricing. # 3. Consensus expects a temporary market reaction Multiple strategists explicitly said: * “knee-jerk reaction” * “hype-based overreaction” * “not durable” When traders expect fade, they price less vol. # What options markets likely imply (rough trader math) If S&P expected move is roughly ±1.5% centered: That corresponds roughly to: * low event vol premium * not a major vol bid * VIX impact likely modest unless outcome surprises In practice: * SPX 1-day move priced roughly in that 1–2% envelope * not panic hedging levels # Where volatility could still surprise Even though baseline is calm, **tail risks exist**. Vol could exceed expectations if: 1. Refund ruling triggers fiscal shock * low probability but high impact 2. Court fully and cleanly upholds tariffs * market consensus leans the other way * surprise could produce sharper selloff 3. Decision language is very broad * markets hate legal ambiguity # My trader-style read Base case (most likely): * Headline drop → quick ±1–2% move * Then partial fade within days * Vol sellers probably win But… This is a classic **low-vol but fat-tail policy event**. Meaning: * Most outcomes small * But one surprise branch could move markets more than priced # Bottom line You are reading it correctly: * Market is **not expecting crazy volatility** * Implied move roughly in the **1% to 2% range** * Street expects **knee-jerk move, not regime change** The real question is not the average move. It is whether the Court delivers a **surprise legal bombshell**. If you want the real edge, I can next tell you: * which sectors are most mispriced into the ruling * or whether buying vol here is statistically smart Say the word.

---

You have to try and understand the market better to invest in it. If you really trust yourself with money you can do it. Just listen to the universe whispering the path to you.

---

I feel you, the path to profitability is accepting to follow stocks after they breakout, not before.

---

I'm an attorney. Sure, there are plenty of us in most places. However, the amount of attorneys who are willing to take this particular case? That would be the real challenge to find one. OP goofed and is not going to find many attorneys who want to spend time on this, especially on a contingency. OP, I suggest continuing your efforts to find representation if you wish to pursue this. If you can't find counsel who will take the case, consider talking to your states' consumer fraud/protection division of the Department of Justice (in the US). You may have similar options available in your area. If they are involved, it shifts things in your favor dramatically. I've never seen a pro se person navigate the judicial system without making at least some small errors, and I've done a lot of litigation in my career. Many pro se plaintiffs have lost an otherwise winning case due to technicalities. Worse, counsel for E-Trade generally aren't worried about a pro se complaint. It will get removed to federal court, maybe a venue change, and then it's unlikely you'd get past summary judgment. There's not much incentive for them to settle with you until you succeed at getting your case past summary judgment and into full discovery. There are dozens of sand traps on the path to getting before a judge, some of which could cause you to lose even more money. I'm sorry this happened and you can file suit on your behalf of you choose. That should be a last resort however. If not a troll, best wishes OP. Disclaimer just because it's WSB: I'm an attorney, but not your attorney in any capacity. I've not reviewed the merits of your case and nothing here is meant to be or replace legal advice from a licensed member of the Bar in your jurisdiction.

---