America At the Crossroads Economically with the Tariffs Case Heard Today by SCOTUS

[Care4all]

One point I heard is interpreting the word "regulate".
Does regulate include tariffs or not?
As Kavanaugh said, "the president can stop trade with any country, but he can't impose a 1% tariff?"

Plus there are other laws that are better regarding presidential tariff authority. Can they be considered?

There were talks on regulate, vs taxing (tariffs)authority. The President can regulate commerce in an emergency...as example, the U.S. engages in war with China, he can regulate trade by putting in limits on China trade, from barring it to putting quotas...without regulating tariffs or imposing tariffs on China, paid by us citizens.

The president is not given tariff authority by congress EVER for merely setting the US Trade policies or for such negotiations. The exception laws by congress are very limited and involve insurrection, rebellion, and an immediate national emergency with another country dispute, like was a case with foreign Steal being dumped in the USA at lowball prices, killing our steel industry with unfair practice.

The authority given by congress in these 3 different laws (and 1 is debatable on any authority, the one trump used) are very very limited.

Trump wasted his opportunity to address our real problems with China trade, and intellectual theft and our imbalance...

and chose to put himself as King Master Trade Agreement Art of the Deal-less, and chose to put our businesses, our forecasters, and the entire world, in to Chaos, changing tariffs each week in to unrealistic 150% ranges and reneging the next....Via tweet, no less....

You show me any law by Congress passing their constitutional authority over to the President to DO THAT CRAP, or where in our Constitution does it give Presidents massive taxing and tariff authority without citizenry representation....??? NO WHERE!

 

[Rawley]

Those Presidents were given limited authority by a vote in congress. Trump was not.

LOL Not sure who is feeding you this nonsense, but it's nonsense.

https://www.npr.org/2024/08/28/nx-s1-5089990/what-expected-tariffs-on-chinese-imports-may-mean-for-americans-and-their-jobs

Trump issued wide spread tariffs on every country, even ones we didn't trade with....there is nothing limiting or giving authority for him to do that....it breaks the constitution and the limited laws congress wrote on tariffs for presidents to use....

There was nothing strategic or limited or an emergency in Trump's tariff proclamations and the reneging of tariff proclamations, and the rehashing even higher regurgitations of tariff rates imposed by him. Helter Skelter.

Is there a limit on the number of countries? Trump's tariffs are 100% strategic. You just hate him and can't or refuse to see it

 

[postman]

Today, the Supreme Court heard the challenge to Trump’s tariffs.

If the Court says Trump cannot impose tariffs, as the law enacted by Congress years ago allows him to do, trillions of dollars of investment in the USA from foreign sources will vanish.

Only the President can speak with one voice; there is no way that a President can achieve such positive deals for the USA while hoping that Congress will back him up and eventually pass tariffs. No way.

If there is no way to get it through congress, than the president shouldn't claim he can do it.

 

[postman]

LOL Not sure who is feeding you this nonsense, but it's nonsense.

https://www.npr.org/2024/08/28/nx-s1-5089990/what-expected-tariffs-on-chinese-imports-may-mean-for-americans-and-their-jobs

The supreme court already ruled in previous similar cases, that if congress delegates an authority they alone possess, they have to do it in a limited and well defined manner.

Such as the many agencies that regulate commerce, such as the department of commerce. They were delegated regulatory authority, but in a limited scope and manner.

See: 15 U.S. Code § 1512 and § 717o

 

[postman]

Is there a limit on the number of countries? Trump's tariffs are 100% strategic. You just hate him and can't or refuse to see it

Trump may "think" they're strategic, and they would be if they were a penalty paid by the country of origin. But instead they were a tariff, which is a tax imposed on the people of the US.

Which as the old saying goes, No taxation without representation

Which is why only congress has the constitutional power to tax the American people.

 

[kyzr]

There were talks on regulate, vs taxing (tariffs)authority. The President can regulate commerce in an emergency...as example, the U.S. engages in war with China, he can regulate trade by putting in limits on China trade, from barring it to putting quotas...without regulating tariffs or imposing tariffs on China, paid by us citizens.

The president is not given tariff authority by congress EVER for merely setting the US Trade policies or for such negotiations. The exception laws by congress are very limited and involve insurrection, rebellion, and an immediate national emergency with another country dispute, like was a case with foreign Steal being dumped in the USA at lowball prices, killing our steel industry with unfair practice.

The authority given by congress in these 3 different laws (and 1 is debatable on any authority, the one trump used) are very very limited.

Trump wasted his opportunity to address our real problems with China trade, and intellectual theft and our imbalance...

and chose to put himself as King Master Trade Agreement Art of the Deal-less, and chose to put our businesses, our forecasters, and the entire world, in to Chaos, changing tariffs each week in to unrealistic 150% ranges and reneging the next....Via tweet, no less....

You show me any law by Congress passing their constitutional authority over to the President to DO THAT CRAP, or where in our Constitution does it give Presidents massive taxing and tariff authority without citizenry representation....??? NO WHERE!

Should be an interesting decision.

If it goes against Trump he will pivot to using the other sections, that are apparently stronger regarding his tariff authority.

I like Trump's tariffs, especially the $400b in new revenue. Which we desperately need to start paying down the debt.

 

[Marener]

If it goes against Trump he will pivot to using the other sections, that are apparently stronger regarding his tariff authority.

That’s what happened with Biden and student loan forgiveness but you guys never were able to understand that either.

 

[Care4all]

LOL Not sure who is feeding you this nonsense, but it's nonsense.

https://www.npr.org/2024/08/28/nx-s1-5089990/what-expected-tariffs-on-chinese-imports-may-mean-for-americans-and-their-jobs

Is there a limit on the number of countries? Trump's tariffs are 100% strategic. You just hate him and can't or refuse to see it

1. The President was given authority by Congress to impose tariffs on China due to unfair trade practices and imbalance, under the Trump administration first term which continued under Biden and until this day, from what I understand.

2. Yes, there are limits and that is what this case is all about...

 

[Rawley]

The supreme court already ruled in previous similar cases, that if congress delegates an authority they alone possess, they have to do it in a limited and well defined manner.

Such as the many agencies that regulate commerce, such as the department of commerce. They were delegated regulatory authority, but in a limited scope and manner.

See: 15 U.S. Code § 1512 and § 717o

LOL Thanks Clarence Ratty

 

[Rawley]

1. The President was given authority by Congress to impose tariffs on China due to unfair trade practices and imbalance, under the Trump administration first term which continued under Biden and until this day, from what I understand.

2. Yes, there are limits and that is what this case is all about...

Read the link, Biden imposed new tariffs on China.

 

[Independent thinker]

Today, the Supreme Court heard the challenge to Trump’s tariffs.

If the Court says Trump cannot impose tariffs, as the law enacted by Congress years ago allows him to do, trillions of dollars of investment in the USA from foreign sources will vanish.

Only the President can speak with one voice; there is no way that a President can achieve such positive deals for the USA while hoping that Congress will back him up and eventually pass tariffs. No way.

In a few months, we will know where we are at on this issue.

Trillions of dollars of investments in the USA are in the balance.

If SCOTUS says the President cannot do this, they will bear the economic responsivity for those deals drying up. SCOTUS cannot wash their hands and say anything else, this will be on them.

The tariffs case and whether amicus briefs matter

Courtly Observations is a recurring series by Erwin Chemerinsky that focuses on what the Supreme Court’s decisions will mean for the law, for lawyers and lower courts, and for people’s lives. […]

www.scotusblog.com

Advisory Opinions live broadcast: Trump's Tariff Showdown

Oral arguments in the Supreme Court’s tariffs case have concluded, but the conversation isn’t over. Listen now to a special live broadcast of the Advisory Opinions podcast to reflect on […]

www.scotusblog.com

I bet this is going to be one of those June 30th decisions.

 

[citygator]

Should be an interesting decision.

If it goes against Trump he will pivot to using the other sections, that are apparently stronger regarding his tariff authority.

I like Trump's tariffs, especially the $400b in new revenue. Which we desperately need to start paying down the debt.

As long as he isnt taxing Americans. If he wants to shut down trade to Mexico because they make fentanyl go for it. Stop all India trade if it is an emergency. But raising taxes on Americans in a “emergency” is utter bullshit.

 

[postman]

Should be an interesting decision.

If it goes against Trump he will pivot to using the other sections, that are apparently stronger regarding his tariff authority.

I like Trump's tariffs, especially the $400b in new revenue. Which we desperately need to start paying down the debt.

Stronger, but more specific. Such as when previous presidents put a tariff on imported steel and aluminum as strategic resources, and key American industries protected from dumping

 

[postman]

I bet this is going to be one of those June 30th decisions.

This case actually should be decided as soon as possible. The longer they wait, the worse the damage would be if they invalidate the tariffs.

 

[Cougarbear]

Is that what you got out of the Supreme court case today when you listened to it all?

It's not what I heard, and I watched all the hours of questions and arguments!

No, I heard Jackson make a fool of herself, again.

 

[Leo123]

Tariffs are NOT taxes. They are negotiating tools for POTUS, not congress or judges in black robes. Moreover, Trump does not have unbounded tariff power. Meanwhile the bureaucracy has unbounded power to effect all aspects of our society through regulation and indirect taxation which raises 'taxes' on everyone.

 

[postman]

Tariffs are NOT taxes. They are negotiating tools for POTUS, not congress or judges in black robes.

And labor walkouts aren't strikes, they're negotiating tools for the "union".

 

[postman]

Meanwhile the bureaucracy has unbounded power to effect all aspects of our society through regulation and indirect taxation which raises 'taxes' on everyone.

The bureaucracy can't impose any taxes. That is purely the constitutional job of congress.
The bureaucracy can only impose fee's and penalties, which are NOT taxes.

Taxes are compulsory levies collected for general government services, while fees are collected for a specific service that benefits the payer, and penalties are imposed as a deterrent against undesirable behavior, such as filing or paying taxes late.

 

[Ringo]

When can I expect my $2000?

A... O.K. then.

 

[Rogue AI]

You better hope they shit-can the tariffs. It's your only hope for the midterms because the economy will improve rapidly once they are gone.

Personally I hope they leave them in place. The worse tRump makes things the more likely you incompetent children will be kicked to the curb.

Absolute nonsense, in fact just the opposite of what it would do to the economy. The only ones who want to tank the economy are you liberal scum. That is your only hope in midterms. A terrible economy is the only thing that might distract people from all the rest of the evil loaded into your degenerate agenda.