Stock Market Tanks After Fed Chair Powell’s Ominous Warning (2025)

Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell warned Wednesday that Donald Trump’s sweeping reciprocal tariff policy would likely raise inflation, despite the president’s many promises to lower prices upon entering office.

“The level of tariff increases announced so far is significantly larger than anticipated, and the same is likely to be true of the economic effects, which will include higher inflation and slower growth,” Powell said during an event hosted by the Economic Club of Chicago.

Powell’s words stand in marked contrast to Trump’s. During a press conference with Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele Monday, Trump claimed that he had “already solved inflation,” after the inflation rate had reached 2.4 percent in March, a six-month low.

“You know, if you look at the numbers, the numbers are incredible, actually. The stock market’s up,” Trump said. But that was only after he sent the stock market sinking with his announcement of blanket 10 percent tariffs on products from nearly every country in the world.

And that was in addition to the 25 percent tariffs he’d already announced on products from Canada and Mexico, as well as 25 percent tariffs on imported cars and autoparts. Not to mention his mounting trade war with China, which involved a 145 percent tariff on Chinese goods—with a temporary exception for electronics—that saddled the U.S. with a reciprocal 125 percent tariff on American exports to China.

When Trump announced a 90-day pause on his sweeping reciprocal tariffs, the stock market immediately shot back up, making millions for the president’s buddies at the expense of weakening the U.S. dollar and the U.S. Treasury market.

Powell warned that Trump’s economic policies were pushing the U.S. into uncharted territory. “There isn’t a modern experience for how to think about this,” Powell said Wednesday.

He added that the Federal Reserve might find itself “in the challenging scenario in which our dual-mandate goals are in tension,” referring to the central bank’s dual mandate of maximum employment and stable prices.

A judge said Wednesday there is probable cause to hold Donald Trump’s administration in criminal contempt for refusing to turn around the El Salvador–bound planes carrying more than 200 Venezuelan immigrants last month.

In a 46-page ruling, U.S. District Judge James Boasberg wrote that the government’s actions “demonstrate a willful disregard” of his previous order that barred Trump from deporting the Venezuelan immigrants—the majority of whom have no criminal record—to El Salvador, where they are currently being held in CECOT, a prison notorious for human rights abuses.

Trump deported the immigrants under the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, an archaic law that has only been invoked three times before, most famously for the internment of Japanese Americans during World War II.

The White House’s blatant disregard of Boasberg’s order is “sufficient to conclude” that there is probable cause for criminal contempt, the judge wrote, adding that none of the government’s explanations have been satisfactory.

Following Boasberg’s first ruling, Trump asked the Supreme Court to impeach the Obama-appointed judge, which Chief Justice Roberts refused, in a rare but telling public statement.

“For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision. The normal appellate review process exists for that purpose,” Roberts said on March 18.

The Supreme Court did however overturn Boasberg’s order at Trump’s request on April 7, giving the president the go-ahead to continue deporting innocent immigrants under the wartime powers act. Last week, the U.S. deported 10 more people it claimed were gang members to El Salvador, according to Secretary of State Marco Rubio. The Trump administration contended to Boasberg that the Supreme Court’s ruling should protect it from criminal contempt, but the judge clearly is fed up with the White House’s relentless excuses.

“The Constitution does not tolerate willful disobedience of judicial orders—especially by officials of a coordinate branch who have sworn an oath to uphold it,” Boasberg’s ruling reads.

Does MAGA have any idea what due process is? Do they care?

Donald Trump’s acolytes continue to insist against providing due process to undocumented immigrants the government claims are gang members.

In March, more than 200 alleged gang members, whose deportations to prison in El Salvador were expedited under the Alien Enemies Act, were denied the right to challenge their designation and removal under the AEA. In many cases, lawyers for the detainees were not even notified that their clients were being deported.

White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller, an anti-immigrant legal activist, has set off on a campaign against “due process” for undocumented immigrants, or whatever he thinks due process is, in support of Trump’s mass deportation plot.

During an appearance on Fox News Tuesday night, while discussing Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Maryland man who was mistakenly deported to El Salvador, Miller claimed that “under the due process that these Democrats so venerate for illegal invaders, it is legally impermissible for him to have one more minute in this country.”

But that’s not how due process works. It was a judge who originally stated that Abrego Garcia could not be removed to El Salvador, and the government’s mistake caused him to be deported.

Members of the Trump administration have claimed that Abrego Garcia is a “convicted” member of MS-13 who was “engaged in human trafficking,” without providing any evidence. Due process would present an opportunity for the government to present any legal justification for an individual’s removal, but because it apparently has none, the process must be elided.

Jack Posobiec, a MAGA activist, also had a loose understanding of what due process is.

“Did Rachel Morin get due process? Did Laken Riley get due process?” he wrote in a post on X Tuesday, referring to two women who were killed by undocumented immigrants. “No one ever asks that.”

Most people never ask about that because the question doesn’t make any sense.

Due process is a legal protection for all people against the U.S. government set out in the Fifth Amendment, and then applied to states in the Fourteenth Amendment.

“No person … shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law,” the Fifth Amendment stated. Conservative Justice Antonin Scalia wrote in a 1993 Supreme Court ruling that “it is well established that the Fifth Amendment entitles aliens to due process of law in deportation proceedings.”

Posobiec’s baseless comment echoes one from border czar Tom Homan, who said last month, “Due process? What was Laken Riley’s due process? Where were all these young women that were killed and raped by members of TdA, where was their due process?”

Earlier this month, the Supreme Court ruled that while the Trump administration could continue deportations under the AEA, it needed to provide detainees with the opportunity to file habeas corpus challenges, a complex and rarely successful legal procedure. The court also ruled that these needed to be filed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, a MAGA-aligned court in Texas where the deportation flights are staged.