"The consolidated cases, Learning Resources v. Trump and Trump v. VOS Selections, challenge Trump's claim that he has the power to issue tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977, which permits the president to regulate transactions involving any property in which any foreign country or national thereof has any interest, in order to deal with an unusual and extraordinary threat."
"Dahlia Lithwick: These arguments were, in some sense, a very granular and fact-based parsing of statutory language. But they also played out at the highest level of questions about separation of powers and delegation. It doesn't often happen that you have such a profound split-screen where you are seeing both micro-analysis of the verbs in IEEPA and at the same time profound questions about the limits of presidential power."
The Supreme Court considered consolidated challenges to presidential tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977. The central question is whether the statute authorizes tariffs by allowing the president to regulate transactions involving property in which foreign countries or nationals have an interest to address an unusual and extraordinary threat. The tariffs at issue were framed as responses to trade deficits, alleged fentanyl smuggling, and measures against Canada. Arguments combined granular statutory parsing with separation-of-powers concerns, and critics noted a surprising absence of sustained economic analysis of the tariffs' rationale.
Read at Slate Magazine
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]