Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you.
Posted on 02/20/2026 1:27:06 PM PST by MinorityRepublican
The Supreme Court’s tariff decision landed about where conventional wisdom said it would: The justices ruled 6–3 that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act simply doesn’t give the president the sweeping authority the Trump administration claimed. That’s not a political rebuke. It’s a legal one, and a narrow one at that.
Chief Justice John Roberts put the bottom line plainly: “We hold that IEEPA does not authorize the President to impose tariffs.”
That’s it. Not that tariffs are unconstitutional. Not that Trump’s trade agenda is illegitimate. Just that this particular statute doesn’t do the work the administration wanted it to do.
The core of the majority’s reasoning is straightforward and, frankly, hard to argue with. Article I gives Congress the power to tax, and tariffs are taxes.
As Roberts explained, “The power to impose tariffs is ‘very clear[ly] . . . a branch of the taxing power.’” The administration conceded the president has no inherent authority to impose tariffs. So everything turned on whether Congress clearly delegated that power in IEEPA.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
|
|
Click here: to donate by Credit Card Or here: to donate by PayPal Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794 Thank you very much and God bless you. |
.
And to be clear, there are specific statues 122, 232 and 301 which congress passed that literally give the president the power to use tariffs, in fact these allow even more aggressive tariffs.
This is turning into a massive boomerang of the “Wile E. Coyote” type on the libs
Not your usual 6-3, Thomas and Kavanaugh had descents, didn’t see the other descent, but the libs voted with the majority.
Three reliable results only decisions form the libs, they always rule for the party, one corrupt ruling from Roberts, one vapid ruling from ACB and a libertarian misfire from Gorsech
Trump can make this a political issue for the midterms, and GOP primaries. The American people like the idea of more tariffs and lower income taxes. Trump should run with it, and use it as a club against the RINOs in the primaries.
Ilya Shapiro is a smart, respected, conservative legal analyst.
He’s also not one of the dreaded, so-called/often incorrectly “RINOs” - I’ll inform/remind people, Shapiro quit George Washington law after the leftists made his life hell over his defense of DJT.
I suspect on the general “idea” - or vibes, as a grandkid recently told me things are measured by - Ilya would disagree with me on tariffs and DJT’s idea generally. He’s probably smarter than me, so especially if we got into the law? He’d likely run circles around me.
This is NOT a “never-trumper” or a TDS sufferer or one of those jokes like “the dumber Billy (K)ry(i)sta(o)l nobody remebers”.
Ilya Shapiro is a voice worth reading and considering.
If you’re angry about the SCOTUS decision but *do* believe in our Republic and Constitution? I’d highly suggest reading his piece - and really just consider and think about it deeply.
As he points out, the legal decision is the right one. I’m glad for it multiple ways, but if you disagree?
Congress should write such laws.
"Trump Sweeping Tariff Agenda Destroyed! No More Kings" to...
"Trump Signature Tariff Agenda Suffers Major Setback!" to...
"Trump Tariff Effort Stymied but There Could be Other Paths." to...
"Trump Finds a Way to Work Around Supreme Court Ruling Forbidding Him From Imposing Unjust Tariffs!" to...
"Why Trump's Tariffs are Bad for America and the World!"...
I'd just point out that in a way, this is the flip side of Biden and his student loan forgiveness efforts. The Supreme Court never said "you can't forgive student loans". What they'd do is invalidate specific student loan forgiveness programs under specific statutes. So, they'd have to try some other legal avenue, most (but not all) of which failed.
That's basically the same thing President Trump is facing here. The Court is doing its job in terms of applying a particular statute, but they're not addressing the much different question of whether other statutes may permit him to impose most of these same tariffs.
It’s a great piece written by someone any rational person - much less anyone that wishes to call themself a “constitutional conservative” - should respect.
Dutifully shared with lots of people I know because I think it’s the smartest analysis I’ve seen on the ruling.
Quite fair, reasonable, and even-handed overview.
Fail
What about those that think this IS an emergency? During Covid the USA couldn’t manufacture basic drugs or protective pharmaceuticals. Tariffs now!
If you don’t want our system of government, just come out and say it.
Plenty of leftists will join you in an alliance of opportunity.
I’d say you can’t get a little bit pregnant, but most people learn that the hard way.
You should go to China where you’d fit right in.
“Emissions must have a price that changes our behavior.”
President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen
Trade in Carbon and Carbon Tariffs
Published: 15 March 2021
As has been said:
“The IEEPA gives the president the power to “investigate, block, regulate...”
“regulate”
*****
A Further Step to the EU Carbon Tariff
Jul 19, 2022
On the afternoon of June 22, the European Commission voted to construct the first regulation on the Carbon Boundary Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) in the worldwide range. This event marks that the European Commission (on July 15, 2021), the Council of the European Union (on March 15, 2022), and the European Parliament (on June 22, 2022) have released their own versions of the CBAM regulations.
The construction of official regulation on carbon tariffs is around the corner and the European Parliament has made preparations to negotiate with member states.
https://www.cirs-group.com/en/chemicals/a-further-step-to-the-eu-carbon-tariff
I’m not the one advocating for a “Xi” but pronounced in English, a laughable “legislature” beholden to the leader, and a court system that is even more laughably subservient than the legislature.
Grow up. Face life. This is not Hollywood. No Great Glorious Leader and no Global Brotherhood of Men is going to save you or care for you or make you super successful.
We have a system of government that I believe, above all, is designed to protect that idea: Individual liberty, individual choices, individual results.
It has quite often been imperfect, even wrong. I don’t care. It has above all, been based on protecting that individual autonomy and casting a stinkeye at any individual branch that gets too big for its britches.
China - at east, the billions of individual Chinese - *WISH* they had a system of government that allowed for a 3-way split of authority, and a circumstances where whatever the “party” (and the party leader) said was the rule.
The worst part of now?
It used to just be the leftists who said the system was obsolete.
Federal courts used order children to be bused around.
Anybody got a copy of the Constitution justifying that?
Yonkers:
You will have low-income housing or my fine will double every day.
Judge Arrogant
You are lost. Not a patriot and think like a stateless economic rapist. In other words a globalist free traitor. Does your family know what a creep you are?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.