- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Robert’s insist that tariffs are a tax on the American people, and a tax needs to come
Posted on 11/6/25 at 3:30 pm to NC_Tigah
Posted on 11/6/25 at 3:30 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
But Barrett was also skeptical at times of the challengers’ arguments. Along with Justice Brett Kavanaugh, she pressed Benjamin Gutman, the solicitor general of Oregon, who represented the group of 12 states, about whether IEEPA on the one hand could give the president very broad powers – for example, allowing him to shut down all trade with another country – but on the other would not allow him to take the much smaller step, in her view, of imposing tariffs. Such a paradox, Kavanaugh suggested, created an “odd donut hole” in IEEPA.
quote:
And much like Barrett and Kavanaugh, Alito pressed Katyal about how IEEPA would operate in an emergency, describing a situation in which there is “an imminent threat of war with a very powerful enemy whose economy was heavily dependent on U.S. trade. Could a President under this provision impose a tariff as a way of trying to stave off that war, or would you say no, the President lacks that power under this” law? Alito appeared to believe that the president would have that power. But it was not clear whether Alito had four other votes on his side.
https://www.scotusblog.com/2025/11/court-appears-dubious-of-trumps-tariffs/
1
Posted on 11/6/25 at 3:33 pm to HailToTheChiz
Back to top
Posted on 11/6/25 at 2:30 pm to Zgeo
quote:
Tariff is not a tax. To think so is making several assumptions and hypothetical extrapolations.
What is it then? It's a tax on goods
A schedule of duties imposed by a government on imported goods
Posted on 11/6/25 at 3:38 pm to Zgeo
quote:It is an assessed penalty.
What is it then? It's a tax on goods
Posted on 11/6/25 at 3:49 pm to N.O. via West-Cal
quote:Such an interesting take. Media influenced?
But that’s beside the point, which is whether Trump’s unilaterally imposed tariffs (taxes) are constitutional. I don’t think they are.
Each of these POTUSes unilaterally imposed tariffs in the last century:
• Franklin D. Roosevelt
• Harry S. Truman
• Dwight D. Eisenhower
• John F. Kennedy
• Richard Nixon
• Gerald Ford
• Jimmy Carter
• Ronald Reagan
• George H. W. Bush
• George W. Bush
• Barack Obama
• Joe Biden
• and of course, DJT
It would seem that should be part of the subject coverage on the issue. Alas, no.
Posted on 11/6/25 at 3:50 pm to N.O. via West-Cal
A tax on the American people is incorrect. We are not being taxed. Its a price increase on foreign goods.
It's why one has been called a Tax and one a Tariff since our founding.
Are Tariffs calculated in your tax return? No?
It's why one has been called a Tax and one a Tariff since our founding.
Are Tariffs calculated in your tax return? No?
Posted on 11/6/25 at 4:30 pm to loogaroo
quote:Right.
And much like Barrett and Kavanaugh, Alito pressed Katyal about how IEEPA would operate in an emergency, describing a situation in which there is “an imminent threat of war with a very powerful enemy whose economy was heavily dependent on U.S. trade. Could a President under this provision ..
I went round and round about this with SFP earlier. The ability to tariff is the wrong hill for the opponents to charge. The question is, "Is an asymmetrical global trading relationship, which was allowed by the US, and extended since WWII, now a sudden emergency?"
Posted on 11/6/25 at 4:34 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
I went round and round about this with SFP earlier.
Futile
He would argue the inverse for someone other than Trump.
Posted on 11/6/25 at 4:47 pm to loogaroo
quote:Nah.
Futile
He's sharpe, he argues legal issues well. He never admits "good points," or "I'd not considered that," and that's a mistake. I'd bet logical counterpoints register though. I'd guess that is why he's here.
Besides it's fun playing on his homefield.
Posted on 11/6/25 at 5:03 pm to NC_Tigah
Posted on 11/6/25 at 5:05 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
None of that is at question
That's the major issue involved in this case.
quote:
However decades ago, Congress ceded rights to tariff to the Executive. Full Stop!
They ceded certain limited rights pursuant to specific statutes, of which the IEEPA was not included.
Posted on 11/6/25 at 5:06 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
Each of these POTUSes unilaterally imposed tariffs in the last century:
Pursuant to specific Congressional authority only.
Posted on 11/6/25 at 5:08 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:As is the case here
Pursuant to specific Congressional authority only.
Posted on 11/6/25 at 5:09 pm to Bunk Moreland
quote:
President Trump says FOREIGN INTERESTS are trying to get him to lose the tariff case so they can take advantage of us again
And people believe this fluff.
Posted on 11/6/25 at 5:09 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
As is the case here
I said specific.
Specific authority to tariff is certainly not the case here.
Posted on 11/6/25 at 5:14 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:According to you. Not according to either analysts or to SCOTUS questions challenging the government.
That's the major issue involved in this case.
quote:Stupid.
of which the IEEPA was not included.
Really not your level. Do better.
You are far better than that bullshite.
Posted on 11/6/25 at 5:17 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
President Trump says FOREIGN INTERESTS are trying to get him to lose the tariff case so they can take advantage of us again
quote:
And people believe this fluff.
Are you on crack? Of course foreign interests are for him losing. It is crippling them. Hell if I was a “foreign entity” I would doing everything possible to stop his tariffs.
Posted on 11/6/25 at 5:18 pm to Warboo
quote:
Are you on crack?
Are you a victim?
Posted on 11/6/25 at 5:21 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
Are you a victim?
No, I don’t own a boat with quad 300 hp motors and try to ship drugs in the Caribbean. I should be good to go.
Posted on 11/6/25 at 5:22 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
Stupid.
Really not your level. Do better.
You are far better than that bullshite.
That is literally the arguments going on at the Supreme Court
quote:
According to you. Not according to either analysts or to SCOTUS questions challenging the government.
You're choosing selections and misattributing summaries of specific lines of question
You can read the DC COA ruling for the issue
quote:
We are not addressing whether the President’s actions should have been taken as a matter of policy. Nor are we deciding whether IEEPA authorizes any tariffs at all. Rather, the only issue we resolve on appeal is whether the Trafficking Tariffs and Reciprocal Tariffs imposed by the Challenged Executive Orders are authorized by IEEPA. We conclude they are not.
That's the issue the Supreme Court just heard oral arguments over yesterday.
Posted on 11/6/25 at 5:23 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:Interesting. I thought several were.
As is the case here
I said specific.
Please detail the cases in which you'd argue the Executive Branch was more authorized to issue tariffs against "enemies" during a world war than those covered by the IEEPA.
Page 23 of 29
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News