- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Score Board
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- SEC Score Board
- 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: Trump is not happy about SCOTUS and tariffs
Posted on 11/9/25 at 12:02 pm to IMSA_Fan
Posted on 11/9/25 at 12:02 pm to IMSA_Fan
quote:
If the Supreme Court uphold this the next Dem is going to have a field day using it to totally reshape our economy into a “green economy” via a Climate Change State of Emergency.
Exactly.
0
Posted on 11/9/25 at 12:30 pm to Vandergriff
quote:
Is this ruling coming soon or are we waiting until next summer? I would think and hope it is imminent.
It may not come until next June, but I suspect we will get a ruling by February.
The process is slow. The Justices first individually research whatever legal issues they find relevant. (Their clerks research it, but the Justices get themselves up to speed) Then they meet as a group and discuss how they think the rulingvshould go. They pick a Justice to write the opinion for each side, and those opinions go through multiple iterations, and Justices start to decide if they want to write their own opinion, or maybe even switch sides.
And they are doing all of these for multiple cases.
They know this one is important, though, so they will probably prioritize it.
Posted on 11/9/25 at 12:35 pm to TigerRealtor
quote:
If he wants to embargo trade with the whole world, he has the power, but it’s his political funeral. He does not have the power to tax though
POTUS doesn't have the power to embargo, either, unless Congress delegates that power to him.
That's really what this whole case is about: exactly what power was delegated to POTUS via IEEPA. All of this talk about taxing power vs. Regulation of trade is just a minor issue in interpreting the statute.
ALL of the power at issue here belongs to Congress, and the question is how much was delegated under IEEPA.
This post was edited on 11/9/25 at 12:59 pm
Posted on 11/9/25 at 12:40 pm to LawTalkingGuy
I feel like IEEPA got really wonky when Congress got stripped of the legislative veto in 1983 which was the key to checking executive overreach within the bill
This post was edited on 11/9/25 at 1:06 pm
Posted on 11/9/25 at 12:56 pm to Major Dutch Schaefer
DEMs use the constitution for their own purposes only.
This post was edited on 11/9/25 at 1:00 pm
Posted on 11/9/25 at 12:57 pm to iamfrankreynolds
quote:
DEMs care about the constitution when it is to their convenience to gain or preserve power.
Doesn't this apply to MAGA and this tariff case, too?
Posted on 11/9/25 at 12:57 pm to CDawson
quote:
Wonder why no other lawsuits were filed against any other Presidents when tariffs were imposed. Weird, right?
Because they did so via the appropriate channels and mechanism and didn’t rely on tards like Stephen miller?
This post was edited on 11/9/25 at 12:59 pm
Posted on 11/9/25 at 12:58 pm to Major Dutch Schaefer
There’s an easy solution to the tariff authority argument
Eliminate the filibuster. Pass a law giving the executive authority to impose tariffs for national security or for the purpose of trade negotiations or balancing trade deficits
Eliminate the filibuster. Pass a law giving the executive authority to impose tariffs for national security or for the purpose of trade negotiations or balancing trade deficits
Posted on 11/9/25 at 1:00 pm to deltaland
quote:
Eliminate the filibuster. Pass a law giving the executive authority to impose tariffs for national security or for the purpose of trade negotiations or balancing trade deficits
Pretty sure those laws already exist
Posted on 11/9/25 at 1:03 pm to IMSA_Fan
quote:
I feel like IEEPA got really wonky when Congress got stripped of the legislative veto in 1983 which was the key to checking executive overreach
I'm pretty much a non-delegation guy, but all of these delegation statutes are now weird. Congress can delegate its power, but the only way to UNdelegate it is to pass a new statute, which has to be signed by POTUS.
If the issue became so.politically hot that you gotvs supermajority of Congress to agree, then they could override a veto, or even threaten impeachment, but that just seems unlikely in today's environment.
Posted on 11/9/25 at 1:08 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Pretty sure those laws already exist
Then why are we questioning if Trump has the authority to impose tariffs ?
Is all of this simply because he invoked the IEEPA and not a different law that grants him the authority? If so, what a massive waste of time and money with litigation if it’s struck down and he just invokes a different law to accomplish the same thing
Posted on 11/9/25 at 1:15 pm to IvoryBillMatt
quote:
For instance how is our national security threatened with our trade surplus with Australia?
That’s for the POTUS to decide not the SCOTUS.
Posted on 11/9/25 at 1:18 pm to deltaland
quote:
Then why are we questioning if Trump has the authority to impose tariffs ?
Trump didn't use THOSE laws.
He used a different law
quote:
Is all of this simply because he invoked the IEEPA and not a different law that grants him the authority?
Yes
quote:
If so, what a massive waste of time and money with litigation if it’s struck down and he just invokes a different law to accomplish the same thing
It would be quite the expensive frickup by the admin, yes.
Posted on 11/9/25 at 1:21 pm to SlowFlowPro
Do DEMs care about America first?
Posted on 11/9/25 at 1:37 pm to Major Dutch Schaefer
quote:
"WHAT THE HELL IS GOING ON???"
Is he channeling Vince Lombardi?
> I wish the v.1 President Trump of 2017-2020 were this assertive, acerbic and aggressive about his rightful Executive Powers and calling out the Monkey Business back then.
Posted on 11/9/25 at 1:41 pm to iamfrankreynolds
quote:
America first
Can you define this without Donald Trump telling you what it is?
Posted on 11/9/25 at 1:42 pm to EphesianArmor
quote:
I wish the v.1 President Trump of 2017-2020 were this assertive, acerbic and aggressive about his rightful Executive Powers and calling out the Monkey Business back then.
Wow, it is almost like people do better when they gain experience.
You may be on to something.
Posted on 11/9/25 at 1:43 pm to RohanGonzales
quote:
Wow, it is almost like people do better when they gain experience.
This tariff fiasco says "hold my beer"
Posted on 11/9/25 at 1:59 pm to RohanGonzales
quote:
Wow, it is almost like people do better when they gain experience.
So "Rookie Syndrome"? Or was it that President Trump (v.1) was not only ill-prepared to be Exec in Chief, but was completely ignorant about exerting Presidential Powers? I don't believe this to be the case. There's Option #3, but no one wants to concede it's possibility.
Of all the Presidents in the past century, none have had nearly as much experience as DJT on being a CEO, personnel dealings hirings, orgs protocols, etc.
Posted on 11/9/25 at 2:01 pm to Major Dutch Schaefer
If that's what they rule, then simply follow the rule: end all trade with the offending countries until Congress passes tariffs.
Page 6 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News