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 10/10/2025 11:15:32 AM PDT by Poison Pill
The Supreme Court will likely agree with lower courts that ruled President Donald Trump can’t use the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to impose broad tariffs, according experts surveyed by JPMorgan.
Trade and legal experts said the odds that the high court will rule against the Trump administration are 70%-80% and expect a decision by the end of the year
(Excerpt) Read more at fortune.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. |
I doubt that. Past Presidents have used tariffs. So would such a ruling be retroactive?
The Trade Act of 1974 codifies everything Trump is doing with trade and tariffs.
Read the Trade Act of 1974. You free traitors need to educate yourself.
Sure you free traitors got a boner now but you will be defeated and deflated.
Assuming they rule that Trump doesn’t have authority, they still have the practical problem of undoing what has been done. If they rule against Trump, I assume they will find a way to keep the status quo for a period of time. Probably give congress time to ratify and/or to renegotiate or to give Trump authority on retro basis.
Free traitors were afraid then. We need to get free traitors back in the closet.
A ruling against may drive the final wedge between the sellout Feds and we the people.
Logically it should be the opposite but corporations are global now . Know your enemy.
I would say a $500 billion annual trade deficit is beyond an emergency.
Wow. Wouldn’t Americaa be on the hook for billions????
What about all the past tariffs collected over the last 200 years? Does all that have to be paid back?
Yup.
Here is the text:
(1) If the United States Trade Representative determines under section 2414(a)(1) of this title that—
(A) the rights of the United States under any trade agreement are being denied; or
(B) an act, policy, or practice of a foreign country—
(i) violates, or is inconsistent with, the provisions of, or otherwise denies benefits to the United States under, any trade agreement, or
(ii) is unjustifiable and burdens or restricts United States commerce;
then the Trade Representative shall take action authorized in subsection (c), subject to the specific direction, if any, of the President regarding any such action, and shall take all other appropriate and feasible action within the power of the President that the President may direct the Trade Representative to take under this subsection, to enforce such rights or to obtain the elimination of such act, policy, or practice. Actions may be taken that are within the power of the President with respect to trade in any goods or services, or with respect to any other area of pertinent relations with the foreign country.
And later on:
(1) For purposes of carrying out the provisions of subsection (a) or (b) or section 2416(c) of this title, the Trade Representative is authorized to—
(A) suspend, withdraw, or prevent the application of, benefits of trade agreement concessions to carry out a trade agreement with the foreign country referred to in such subsection;
(B) impose duties or other import restrictions on the goods of, and, notwithstanding any other provision of law, fees or restrictions on the services of, such foreign country for such time as the Trade Representative determines appropriate;
This is why everything Trump has done has been under the proclamation that the US is being subjected to unfair trade practices from countries all over the world and that his actions are a counter to those practices.
Yeah I get it. I could just as easily take your side of the argument.
It all comes down to whether you think our Constitutional Republic is currently functioning - whether it is accountable to the people.
I think it’s not - I think it’s been hijacked - we need a new Declaration.
Remember, many of the same Founders that drafted the Constitution also drafted the Declaration, which had a completely different tone.
The Declaration was not an instruction manual for limiting power and self-imposing checks and balances. It was a justification for removing a tyrannical government by force.
I think that’s where we are right now - and you are correct: the Left could say the same thing - actually, I think they already have, in so many words.
The Left already declared war on us. The Left has already shown it is not willing to be constrained by the Constitution - and if our side continues to play by the rules of the Constitution, ours will be the only side doing so.
I would love it if we could somehow wrestle the Left back into submitting itself to the rules if the Constitution - and spare us from having to fight American Revolution II.
The way the Left has weaponized our institutions and conspired to thwart the will of the people by attempting to destroy a duly elected POTUS - that is most definitely NOT Constitutional. So, either a lot of them need to go to prison, or we have to face up to the fact that we are not in Kansas anymore.
Experts said he would be in jail by now.
Congress gave up control of tariffs to the executive branch. If scotus rules against him then we are back to constitutional controls as designed by our founders.
I have no idea what the hell you’re talking about.
Statute can not supersede the Constitution.
What? The Trade Act of 1974 was found Constitutional.
These tariffs are based on the IEEPA. That’s the statute at issue.
Right. If necessary Trump will use the Trade Act.
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.