It is Congress’s prerogative to clarify, limit, or possibly augment the President’s authority under the IEEPA
.
It is an irrefutable fact that Congress, by the terms of our Constitution, is granted exclusive power to lay and collect imposts and duties (tariffs), and is also vested with exclusive power to “Regulate Commerce with foreign Nations”. As such, ownership of these exclusive powers gives enormous credibility to the argument that Congress, our elected Representatives and Senators, by necessary extension likewise has the power to clarify, limit, or possibly augment the President’s authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, and not a judge or a majority of Justices on our Supreme Court.
Should a majority on the Supreme Court meddle in the making of foreign policy via Congress’s exclusive powers mentioned above would in effect be negating the very reason of having a written constitution and elections . . . elections which are intentionally intended to accommodate for change in public policy, as opposed to unelected judges and Justices imposing their whims, fancies and personal predilections as the rule of law.
Seems crystal clear to me that our courts are not vested with authority to sit in judgement over policy making decisions, and certainly not foreign policy making decisions.
In regard to Congress’s policy making power carried out through the laying and collecting of taxes, and regulating commerce, let me once again note what our Supreme Court has emphatically concluded with respect to policy making authority “…..we are not at liberty to second-guess congressional determinations and policy judgments of this order, however debatable or arguably unwise they may be…The wisdom of Congress’ action, however, is not within our province to second guess.”
_________ELDRED et al. v. A S H C R O F T, ATTORNEY GENERAL (2003)
And, Justice Stone reminds all of us that:
“The power of courts to declare a statute unconstitutional is subject to two guiding principles of decision which ought never to be absent from judicial consciousness. One is that courts are concerned only with the power to enact statutes, not with their wisdom. The other is that while unconstitutional exercise of power by the executive and legislative branches of the government is subject to judicial restraint, the only check upon our own exercise of power is our own sense of self-restraint. For the removal of unwise laws from the statute books appeal lies, not to the courts, but to the ballot and to the processes of democratic government.” U.S. v. Butler, 297 U.S. 1, 78-79 (1936)
In consideration of the above, it seems more than just obvious that our Supreme Court is obligated by the terms of our Constitution to yield to Congress’s exclusive taxing and regulatory power over commerce, and by extension must confirm it is likewise Congress’s prerogative to clarify, limit, or possibly augment the President’s authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act.
JWK
Why have a written constitution approved by the people if those who it is meant to control and regulate are free to make it mean whatever they want it to mean?
