Trump is back in action. On the 18th early morning, he directly stated that tariffs will be imposed on NATO countries opposing the Greenland issue. How clear is this signal? Tariffs are his most convenient and least restrictive tool, and he doesn't distinguish between enemies and friends at all.

But even more interesting than the tariff policy itself is the reaction from the U.S. Supreme Court—one word: silence. The ruling date keeps being postponed, and this kind of stalling itself hints at hidden motives. The most reasonable explanation is that the Supreme Court may be intentionally giving the President some space, not wanting to limit the President's powers. In other words, Trump's influence within the judicial system is indeed there.

Why? Because if the Supreme Court directly rules that tariffs are illegal, it would cause too much commotion. First, it would disrupt global trade expectations; second, it would force Trump to adopt even more outrageous tactics, pushing uncertainty to the maximum, which the market can't handle.

The real issue is targeting allies. This touches on the bottom line that both the internal U.S. system and the entire alliance network care about. So the most likely scenario now is a compromise: retain the existing tariffs, but any future increases must go through Congress. This makes Trump's recent provocations against NATO less tenable, and both parties can find a way to step down.

Or simply "delay"—no ruling, no denial, pushing the trouble to after the mid-term elections. In the short term, it's not about the outcome but the rhythm. If there's still no movement by next Tuesday, the market will expect long-term delays.