Join institutional investors, analysts and strategists from the world's largest banks: Subscribe today
Already have an account? log in
Why Trump’s Supreme Court Tariff Case Is ‘Too Big To Lose’
Donald Trump's tariff regime or, getting straight to the point, pending litigation against the levie
My money is that the Roberts Court creates a national security carveout for the Major Questions Doctrine (a creation of theirs, of course) to endorse the tariffs, in part relying on the dissent from the Federal Circuit Court level.
I thought this opinion piece from Lawfare was a decent read as well, though I agree these tariffs will remain in place in some manner, irrespective of the outcome of this particular case: https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/the-situation–i-ll-wait-and-see-on-the-tariffs-case
Justice Gorsuch writes the majority opinion relying primarily on the the “nondelegation doctrine.” Several concurring opinions. No wiggle room for the orange Humpty-dumpty.
H has laid out the perfect argument for why no US president has the powers Trump claims. The Founders lived in a world of unified executive power. They lived the fact that it always goes bad at some point. The separation of powers was a founding/core principle. No way were they going to let the power of the purse be left in the hands of one lunatic, better to leave it to elected hundreds that had to create policy through a deliberative democratic process. So, what Trump has created to date is proof the Founders were right because it’s a mess. I often wonder if the scotus “originalists” only studied law and never had any American history.