Authored by Mike Shedlock via mishtalk,
Pressure is on Justices Thomas, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Alito.
Trump Moans on Truth Social
Trump Truth Social Link: ALL TARIFFS ARE STILL IN EFFECT! Today a Highly Partisan Appeals Court incorrectly said that our Tariffs should be removed, but they know the United States of America will win in the end. If these Tariffs ever went away, it would be a total disaster for the Country. It would make us financially weak, and we have to be strong. The U.S.A. will no longer tolerate enormous Trade Deficits and unfair Tariffs and Non Tariff Trade Barriers imposed by other Countries, friend or foe, that undermine our Manufacturers, Farmers, and everyone else. If allowed to stand, this Decision would literally destroy the United States of America. At the start of this Labor Day weekend, we should all remember that TARIFFS are the best tool to help our Workers, and support Companies that produce great MADE IN AMERICA products. For many years, Tariffs were allowed to be used against us by our uncaring and unwise Politicians. Now, with the help of the United States Supreme Court, we will use them to the benefit of our Nation, and Make America Rich, Strong, and Powerful Again! Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Mark Levin Chimes In
Mark Levin Truth Social Link: THE APPELLATE COURT MAJORITY TARIFF DECISION WAS WRONG
The appellate court majority that ruled against most of the president’s tariffs has it wrong. Whether you like tariffs or not, the act at issue does, in fact, grant the president broad powers to declare an emergency. Even more, the Constitution, under Article II, grants the president broad powers to make foreign policy. The president’s lawyers are obviously aware of this, which is why the executive orders at issue rely, in part, on serious foreign policy considerations, including, as an example, Mexico, Canada, and China, which the president has determined are not doing enough to prevent the flow of deadly drugs into our country. The combination of broad authority and Article II powers trump the issues raised by the court’s majority. Moreover, judges should not be the final decision-makers about such matters as they’re exercising authority that was never delegated to them, and they should not substitute their own policy preferences for the president’s. The check here is Congress — that is, if it wishes to amend the law or pass a new law curbing the president’s power here. That said, Congress does not have boundless power, and it could run into separation of powers issues, given Article II and the president’s foreign policy authority. The Supreme Court will, once again, rule on this. In the past, Justices Thomas, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh have noted the broad authority of the president in circumstances similar to this. I expect Justice Alito would concur.
Trump “Re-Truthed” the above post, also putting pressure on the named justices.
Levin Irony
The irony in Levin’s post on separation of powers is amusing. It would behoove Levin to understand that ability to tariff Constitutionally belongs in the Senate.
Moreover, Congress cannot cede that authority even if it tried. That would take a constitutional amendment.
In this case, as in Biden’s foolish attempt to forgive student loans, a “major question” issue comes into play.
Like all Trumpian suck-ups, Levin wants Trump to get away with such nonsense, but not Democrats.
Interesting Set of Justices
Levin stated “In the past, Justices Thomas, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh have noted the broad authority of the president in circumstances similar to this. I expect Justice Alito would concur.”
Lovely. But that’s only four isn’t it? Are all of those certain? Importantly, even if so, who is the fifth?
Trump Needs an Activist Court to Win
I discussed this on August 27, in Can Trump’s Tariff Revenues Help Pay for the Federal Budget Deficit?
It would be amazing if the appeals court ruled for Trump. But the key question is how the Supreme Court will rule.
Recall that the Court ruled against Biden on student loans largely on the basis of the “major question”. There are even more reasons to strike the idea here.
However, although it’s constitutionally clear, a ruling against Trump is by no means certain.
Hypothetical Vote Count
The three liberal justices are certain to vote against Trump. That means we need two more.
Pair 1: Barrett and Roberts
Pair 2: Barrett and Gorsuch
Pair 3: Gorsuch and RobertsIf I am correct, I think Barrett is already on board. I can’t help but think Roberts will go with the majority, and perhaps decide.
If it’s pair 2, add Roberts for a 6-3 decision. The bigger the majority, the more cover for all of them.
So expect an appeals court ruling against Trump. Then we will see if common sense, precedent, major questions, and emergencies apply to Republican presidents as well as Democrats.
The Appeals Court ruling went as expected, and called in advance.
Surprise Not
Please consider what I wrote on June 10 in Justice Department Asks Appeals Court to Let Trump Tariffs Remain for Longer
The word tariff is not even in the act. Nor are synonyms like duties.
Second, there is no emergency. An emergency is a sudden unexpected crisis. Trade deficits have existed for decades.
Third, there is no unusual or extraordinary threat. Trump has even imposed tariffs on nations with which we have no trade deficit including islands inhabited only by penguins.
Fourth, there is lack of a clear authorization by Congress to grant Trump such authority. The applicable principle involved is called “major question”.
The Tax foundation estimates the cost of Trump’s tariffs to be over $2 trillion. If that’s not a “major question” then what is?
This is a similar to the setup in which Biden attempted to suspend student loans that would also have an impact of $400 billion.
Trump seeks a bigger than any previous Supreme Court “major question” ruling including student loans.
Finally, we get to the issue of delegation. The Supreme Court has ruled that Congress has no authority to simply giving away its constitutional rights.
Unfortunately, that does not stop other foolish actions.
The Appeals Court noted the major questions issue and Biden’s student loans.
On June 6, I noted Reciprocal Tariffs Are Dead, but Trump Has 7 Other Options to Discuss
Trump wants to maneuver around the court’s tariff crackdown. His success will be limited.
Although his “success” will limited, Trump can and will do many more damaging actions.
In fact, he already has.
Trump Will Double Steel and Aluminum Tariffs to 50 Percent
On May 31, I commented Trump Will Double Steel and Aluminum Tariffs to 50 Percent
Insistent that US manufacturers who use steel will pay still more, especially the auto industry and small businesses, Trump Says Steel and Aluminum Tariffs Will Double to 50%.
Steel and aluminum tariffs are incredibly stupid. However, they are far more likely to stick because the Supreme Court may not want to buck Trump on matters of national security.
Activist Court?
Trump moans about “activist courts”.
The problem is we have an over the top, arrogant, activist president who does not give a damn about the constitution.
Reader Comments
I added what follows as an addendum to my post yesterday, Full Appeals Court Rules 7-4 Against Trump’s Reciprocal Tariffs
Comment to Mish: “Like the democrats, Mike, you are putting your personal (and selfish) agenda above the good of the country.”
My Reply: Like an fool who cannot think, you do not respect the Constitution.
It is that simple. I outlined the case 100% correctly, in advance, got a 7-4 ruling on that.The court even cited the case I mentioned of Biden’s student loans. If the court allowed this, then it should have allowed student loans. And who knows what Democrats will do if the President is always right.
I suggest you read the ruling, what I said in advance, and explain how it is “selfish” to respect the Constitution.
I have no selfish agenda in this. You have what is known as TWS. Trump Worship Syndrome and it has poisoned your mind.
Levin is afflicted my coined term, TDS Type II, alternatively TWS.
To repeat: The problem is we have an over the top, arrogant, activist president who does not give a damn about the constitution. And neither do his TWS followers.
If Mark Levin @marklevinshow wishes to debate me on this, I am game.
Debate on Mr. Levin?
