re: Goldman Responds To Court Block Of Trump Tariffs: Nothingburger, White House Can Sidestep

This was strictly an IEEPA case, and no previous president has ever used IEEPA for tariffs. Mainly because IEEPA doesn't authorize tariffs.

You cannot argue legally (or hell even with a straight face) that every import from every country is an “unusual and extraordinary threat”.

quote:

---

I said he was wrongfully deported to El Salvador because of the holding order

---

What holding order?

quote:

---

---

Never insinuated that but the exponential increase in injunctions vs all other presidents in history combined is concerning

Did you just compare yourself to them?? Lol that is comical

quote:

---

Is that the new interpretation of Executive Authority without Congressional disapproval?
So all Trump has to now do to engage another country militarily is get a Declaration of War??

---

I'm uncertain just how sarcastic you are being here.

But, just to be clear on my end, Congress is the body with tariff authority. The only tariff power POTUS has is granted to the office by Congress. If POTUS has exceeded his granted authority, then get Congress to act.

And, yes, a clear Declaration of War would be nice once in a while. Far preferable to a vague Authorization for the Use of Military Force.

quote:

---

Did you just compare yourself to them?? Lol that is comical

---

I didn't. You did, everytime you flap your ignorant lips about "all lawyers...."

What a bizarre conflation.

Using our fiscal irresponsibility as a legal defense for putting tariffs on everything from everywhere (wo congressional approval) will easily be dismissed.

In fact, it just was!

quote:

---

You cannot argue legally (or hell even with a straight face) that every import from every country is an “unusual and extraordinary threat”.

---

well, he didn't argue that every import was an unusual and extraordinary threat.

He argued that fentanyl (EO-emergency 14193), the excessive illegal border crossings (EO-emergency 14194) and opioid supply chain specific to China (EO-emergency 14195), and unfair trade practices (EO 14257) constituted unusual and extraordinary threats, plural.

And you are right, tariffs have never been used for/under this before, only a broad range of sanctions and export restrictions on a whole host of countries. So there is where a [valid] argument lies. However, IEEPA does not limit it to sanctions or forbid tariffs either.

What this ruling really does is remove the President's ability to do an emergency declaration.

So the border- not an emergency. +100k fentanyl deaths- not an emergency +20-30 million illegals- that's very ordinary, etc.

So yes, I can, with a straight face, make the argument tariffs are a legitimate response to unusual and extraordinary just as sanctions or having our allies agree not to buy oil from Iran or limiting pipeline materials to Sadaam. It might (obviously) be a losing argument. But to dismiss it as ridiculous and no one could dare say such a thing with a straight face is of itself way more ridiculous.

lol yeah okay sure. But call you shot since you know, what ultimately happens to the sweeping tariffs across the board???

“The court's rationale drew on the nondelegation doctrine and major questions doctrine - two centerpieces of conservative judicial philosophy.”

Follow up, who specifically do you think is overturning this???