re: Fed Appeals Court rules most Trump tariffs illegal, next step Supreme Court

quote:

---

It’s another thing to tariff every country in the world,

---

Like George W Bush did?

President George W. Bush imposed tariffs on a variety of steel products beginning in March 2002 and lasting for three years and one day. The rates ranged from 8 percent to 30 percent on certain steel product imports from all countries except Canada, Israel, Jordan, and Mexico

quote:

---

The President doesn’t have the authority to levee tariffs.

---

Wrong

quote:

---

While the Constitution gives Congress the power to impose tariffs, Congress has delegated some of this authority to the President through various laws. This means that a president can apply tariffs without a new, specific act of Congress, as long as they are acting within the scope of these existing laws.

?The key statutes that give the president this authority include:

?**Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962: This law allows the president to impose tariffs on imports if the Secretary of Commerce determines that those imports threaten to impair national security.

?Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974: This law authorizes the president to take action, including imposing tariffs, to enforce U.S. rights under trade agreements or to respond to a foreign country's unfair trade practices.
?
The International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA): This act grants the president broad authority to regulate a variety of economic transactions in response to a declared national emergency.

---

quote:

---

The President doesn’t have the authority to levee tariffs.

---

quote:

---

Wrong

---

And you cite:

quote:

---

Trade Act of 1974

---

quote:

---

do you think Presidents should be able to violate the law/Constitution if it "heals and makes the economy stronger"?

---

Of course they do.

Do you even have to ask this?

This is populism. The ends justify any means. The leftist populists have operated this way for decades, now the rightist ones will. Because that's what populism does.

All the populists who are right now scoffing at the idea that Trump is serious and only "trolling the left" with his talking about running again in 2028 will—if it turns out that Trump is serious about it, which I think is even odds at minimum—easily pivot towards justifying it on the same basis that they are now justifying these tariffs.

"We can't turn the country back over to the left; we can either ignore the Constitution and save the country or act beholden to 'muh principles' and allow it to be flushed down the toilet!"

"What good does it do to follow 'muh Constitution' if that means the whole country collapses?"

"Cuck Republicans sat on their precious 'principles' while the left did X, Y, and Z! We can't win by following the rules, we have to act like they do!"

If you can't already imagine the narrative I don't know what to tell you.

Populists—whether on the right or the left—do not care about law, checks and balances, the Constitution, or any republican (as in, the Republic, not the Republican Party) values.

They only care about their ends and they will justify any means or disregard any stabilizing pillars of society to achieve those ends.

This is why I have been posting for years that the embrace of populism, now by both sides, is what will ultimately end the country.

Pay attention to what they are saying on this thread, because the arguments you are seeing here are the same ones you will see in two years if Trump does attempt to run again.

And anyone who thinks he won't try that if he thinks he can accomplish it is ignoring his track record, including these tariffs.

For the record, I don't think he'll be successful; I think the system will end up preventing it. My point is not that he'll succeed—my point is that if he thinks he has a chance, he'll try, and everyone who is here justifying these tariffs even though they have been ruled illegal by one court and supporting ignoring the SCOTUS if they uphold the ruling, will also be here justifying ignoring the Constitution as it pertains to Trump running again if he tries.

quote:

---

All Trump has to do is what he should have done all along: Get Congress to give him the statutory authority he needs here.

---

And why is it that you think Trump has NOT involved Congress in these tariffs? The Republicans have both houses.

It could be that he doesn't have enough support among his own party...which then should lead a thinking person to conclude, "Hey, that's why the FFers spread this power out...to keep it from being concentrated in one person so as to increase the chances that it's an actual good idea. Forcing it to have broad consensus to be enacted. Boy, they were wise."

But of corse that never occurs to a populist.

Here's another theory: What if Trump is testing just how much power he can unilaterally wield? Just testing how much dictatorial authority he can get away with?

-———-————————
Removing Trump would result in an open civil war and everyone in DC knows it.

They’ll undermine him but they won’t cross that line
————————————

If COVID didn’t prove that people generally will roll over, nothing will. The persecution of J6ers only made doing nothing even more likely (which was the point). Only the left has the balls to take to the streets. They have empty, godless lives and don’t have spouses or kids or jobs to consider.

quote:

---

Which part of the IEEPA are you relying on, specifically, to make this claim?

---

Im not. There isnt a national emergency

quote:

---

Im not. There isnt a national emergency

---

Well then Trump can't enact tariffs using that statute, and you agree with the Court of Appeals.

quote:

---

There has to be an end game. I THINK he has one

---

Seems to be situational.