As Don says, "let's see what happens."

[berg80]

President Donald Trump’s sweeping tariff powers and recent trade deals could soon run into a legal buzzsaw.

A federal appeals court is set to hear oral arguments next week in a high-profile lawsuit challenging Trump’s stated authority to effectively slap tariffs at any level on any country at any time, so long as he deems them necessary to address a national emergency.

The Trump administration says that that expansive tariff power derives from the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA.

The bulk of Trump’s biggest tariffs — including his fentanyl-related duties on Canada, Mexico and China, and the worldwide “reciprocal” tariffs he first unveiled in early April — rest on his invocation of that law.

The U.S. Court of International Trade struck those tariffs down in late May, ruling that Trump exceeded his authority under IEEPA.
https://www.cnbc.com/2025/07/26/trump-tariffs-trade-lawsuits.html

Question for trump fans. If the SC rules trump exceeded his authority by unilaterally imposing tariffs, making them illegal, are you in favor of keeping them in place anyway? IOW, is it okay for him to break the law to reach the desired outcome you favor?

 

[Meister]

And if the SC doesn't rule the way you're hoping for?

 

[0311]

President Donald Trump’s sweeping tariff powers and recent trade deals could soon run into a legal buzzsaw.

A federal appeals court is set to hear oral arguments next week in a high-profile lawsuit challenging Trump’s stated authority to effectively slap tariffs at any level on any country at any time, so long as he deems them necessary to address a national emergency.

The Trump administration says that that expansive tariff power derives from the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA.

The bulk of Trump’s biggest tariffs — including his fentanyl-related duties on Canada, Mexico and China, and the worldwide “reciprocal” tariffs he first unveiled in early April — rest on his invocation of that law.

The U.S. Court of International Trade struck those tariffs down in late May, ruling that Trump exceeded his authority under IEEPA.
https://www.cnbc.com/2025/07/26/trump-tariffs-trade-lawsuits.html

Question for trump fans. If the SC rules trump exceeded his authority by unilaterally imposing tariffs, making them illegal, are you in favor of keeping them in place anyway? IOW, is it okay for him to break the law to reach the desired outcome you favor?

The Constitution is very clear, only Congress levy tariffs.

 

[shockedcanadian]

The Constitution is very clear, only Congress levy tariffs.

Congress put you $37T in the hole

 

[kyzr]

The Constitution is very clear, only Congress levy tariffs.

Congress delegated tariff authority to the president.

https://www.cnn.com/2025/04/08/politics/tariffs-trump-power-constitution-congress

Congress gave presidents power over tariffs. They could aways take it back​

While there are enough Republican senators on board to work with Democrats on the bill and overcome a filibuster, there still isn’t enough support to reach the 67 votes it would require to override a promised White House veto.

The president's veto wins, period, full stop.

 

[Meister]

The Constitution is very clear, only Congress levy tariffs.

It also allows the president to adjust tariffs.

This report examines Congress's constitutional power over import tariffs, Congress's ability to delegate some of its authority over tariffs to the President within certain limits, the scope of specific authorities Congress has delegated to the President to impose or adjust tariffs, and the ways in which courts have resolved challenges to the President's use of those authorities. The report also provides an overview of some of the legal debates surrounding recent tariff actions by the President.

The Constitution grants Congress the power to regulate foreign commerce, impose tariffs, and collect revenue. As discussed in this report, Congress has long enacted laws authorizing the President to adjust tariff rates on goods in certain circumstances. Courts have generally upheld these laws against constitutional challenges, holding that they do not impermissibly delegate Congress's legislative power over tariffs to the executive branch.

https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R48435

 

[berg80]

And if the SC doesn't rule the way you're hoping for?

You can't figure that out for yourself? Now, please answer the question.

 

[berg80]

It also allows the president to adjust tariffs.

This report examines Congress's constitutional power over import tariffs, Congress's ability to delegate some of its authority over tariffs to the President within certain limits, the scope of specific authorities Congress has delegated to the President to impose or adjust tariffs, and the ways in which courts have resolved challenges to the President's use of those authorities. The report also provides an overview of some of the legal debates surrounding recent tariff actions by the President.

The Constitution grants Congress the power to regulate foreign commerce, impose tariffs, and collect revenue. As discussed in this report, Congress has long enacted laws authorizing the President to adjust tariff rates on goods in certain circumstances. Courts have generally upheld these laws against constitutional challenges, holding that they do not impermissibly delegate Congress's legislative power over tariffs to the executive branch.

https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R48435

Federal trade court strikes down Trump’s reciprocal tariffs​

https://www.cnbc.com/2025/05/29/court-strikes-down-trump-reciprocal-tariffs.html

As Dotard says, "many people are saying" the tariffs are not legal. My question........which no one wants to answer........is whether you think he should ignore the SC if it rules against him?

 

[justoffal]

Congress put you $37T in the hole

Because they are bought and owned by alien entities unfriendly to the United States.
The idea that the United States might actually eliminate its deficit is horrifying to the likes of the CCP and others.

 

[toobfreak]

You can't figure that out for yourself? Now, please answer the question.

ENGLISH TRANSLATION: I got no farging idea and was hoping you wouldn't ask. As usual, best I keep my mouth shut and thought the fool than to actually try to back up my own statement and prove it.

 

[Meister]

Federal trade court strikes down Trump’s reciprocal tariffs​

https://www.cnbc.com/2025/05/29/court-strikes-down-trump-reciprocal-tariffs.html

As Dotard says, "many people are saying" the tariffs are not legal. My question........which no one wants to answer........is whether you think he should ignore the SC if it rules against him?

The way the federal judges have been ruling over the last few years, I certainly wouldn't trust them.
Unelected and most look to be appointed by democrats on the court, I'll wait for the SC.

 

[Meister]

You can't figure that out for yourself? Now, please answer the question.

What would Biden do?

 

[0311]

@please just quit and kyzer. Read Article I. Section VIII to understand only Congress has the power to levy taariffs.

The 1st Article of the U.S. Constitution

SECTION. 1. All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.

constitutioncenter.org

Then read Article II on Powers of the Executive.

https://constitution.findlaw.com/article2.html

NO the Executive does NOT have the power to levy tariffs.

Denying that truth, does NOT change that truth. Only Congress can levy tariffs.

 

[Meister]

@please just quit and kyzer. Read Article I. Section VIII to understand only Congress has the power to levy taariffs.

The 1st Article of the U.S. Constitution

SECTION. 1. All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.

constitutioncenter.org

Then read Article II on Powers of the Executive.

https://constitution.findlaw.com/article2.html

NO the Executive does NOT have the power to levy tariffs.

Denying that truth, does NOT change that truth. Only Congress can levy tariffs.

Congress has delegated to the President to impose or adjust tariffs,

https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R48435

 

[excalibur]

The Constitution is very clear, only Congress levy tariffs.

Congress gave the President the authority.

 

[excalibur]

Too bad, so sad, most of the trade deals are almost all done.

Why do you hate America, OP? Why? Only the CCP is hoping for what you are hoping for in the OP.

 

[Papageorgio]

President Donald Trump’s sweeping tariff powers and recent trade deals could soon run into a legal buzzsaw.

A federal appeals court is set to hear oral arguments next week in a high-profile lawsuit challenging Trump’s stated authority to effectively slap tariffs at any level on any country at any time, so long as he deems them necessary to address a national emergency.

The Trump administration says that that expansive tariff power derives from the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA.

The bulk of Trump’s biggest tariffs — including his fentanyl-related duties on Canada, Mexico and China, and the worldwide “reciprocal” tariffs he first unveiled in early April — rest on his invocation of that law.

The U.S. Court of International Trade struck those tariffs down in late May, ruling that Trump exceeded his authority under IEEPA.
https://www.cnbc.com/2025/07/26/trump-tariffs-trade-lawsuits.html

Question for trump fans. If the SC rules trump exceeded his authority by unilaterally imposing tariffs, making them illegal, are you in favor of keeping them in place anyway? IOW, is it okay for him to break the law to reach the desired outcome you favor?

If the Supreme Court rules it unconstitutional then we abide by the Constitution.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

IOW, is it okay for him to break the law to reach the desired outcome you favor?

For Trump Cult members, of course it is.

Trump is a criminal and convicted felon, as president he’s already violated numerous laws and has engaged in an un-Constitutional abuse of power.

 

[whitehall]

"Let's see what happens" was the anthem of the Biden administration. The problem was that old Joe forgot what happened.

 

[Meister]

For Trump Cult members, of course it is.

Trump is a criminal and convicted felon, as president he’s already violated numerous laws and has engaged in an un-Constitutional abuse of power.

Did you libbies go after Biden when he disregarded the SC over the student forgiveness program?

Of course you didn't, so don't try and take the high road, it falls flat.