- 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: Trump tariffs blocked by US Court of International Trade
Posted on 5/28/25 at 8:20 pm to IvoryBillMatt
Posted on 5/28/25 at 8:20 pm to IvoryBillMatt
Does some one have an explanation about. who. should negotiate trade policy with the 187 some odd different countries. Congress has been unable to negotiate a budget with itself for the last 20 years. Congress has been unable to pass a single meaningful bill in the last 5 months. Congress no longer passes meaningful laws with detail sufficient to guide the beauracrats. 500 fed district courts apparently have the nation wide injunction function to prevent police from stopping very criminal acts from being done. And the Supreme Court is no longer supreme but rather subservient to the district courts.
Trump started off very well with the Doge, USAID, cabinet, riddance of DEI,etc. The swamp has regrouped and is working hard to shut down the progress. Time for trump to go asymetrical and hit from a new direction.
Trump started off very well with the Doge, USAID, cabinet, riddance of DEI,etc. The swamp has regrouped and is working hard to shut down the progress. Time for trump to go asymetrical and hit from a new direction.
This post was edited on 5/28/25 at 8:22 pm
1
Posted on 5/28/25 at 8:20 pm to TigersHuskers
Trump is the only president in history to win popular vote, Electoral vote, and his party win both congressional chambers and have a favorable idealogical majority in SCOTUS and still be essentially a lame duck from day 1.
What you’re seeing is the effect of decades of political maneuvering and establishing of courts, rules, precedents, agencies, etc all designed to protect the status quo the deep state prefers. It’s impossible to upend it all or circumvent it.
There is only way to fix this, and it is not by peaceful means.
What you’re seeing is the effect of decades of political maneuvering and establishing of courts, rules, precedents, agencies, etc all designed to protect the status quo the deep state prefers. It’s impossible to upend it all or circumvent it.
There is only way to fix this, and it is not by peaceful means.
Posted on 5/28/25 at 8:21 pm to ksayetiger
quote:
So every tariffs other countries put on the USA is blocked as well, correct?
Negative, all courts, including our own, consistently rule it is acceptable to screw the USA in any capacity.
Posted on 5/28/25 at 8:23 pm to Trevaylin
quote:
Does some one have an explanation about. who. should negotiate trade policy with the 187 some odd different countries. Congress has been unable to negotiate a budget with itself for the last 20 years. Congress has been unable to pass a single meaningful bill in the last 5 months. Congress no longer passes meaningful laws with detail sufficient to guide the beauracrats. 500 fed district courts apparently have the nation wide injunction function to prevent police from stopping very criminal acts from being done. And the Supreme Court is no longer supreme but rather subservient to the district courts.
There’s a greater than 90% chance you’ll vote to reelect your Congressman.
Posted on 5/28/25 at 8:25 pm to The Egg
So the court is supposed to have nine justices with no more than 5 from one party.
Four were appointed by Obama and 2 by Biden. Three by Trump.
I’m sure it’s all very judicious.
Four were appointed by Obama and 2 by Biden. Three by Trump.
I’m sure it’s all very judicious.
Posted on 5/28/25 at 8:26 pm to Warboo
quote:
You run what you brung at the track. Let’s see how this “uncontroversial” works out. I think it will end up similar to your spelling. Good luck.
Not sure what you're trying to say. I spelled uncontroversial the only way I know how. What did I get wrong?
[quote]uncontroversial - adjective - Causing no controversy. [quote]
As for what I wrote, I trusted President Trump on the POLICY of tariffs, I just didn't think he had the authority to impose them without Congressional action. Maybe some of the narrowly defined ones can be tied to some specific emergency, but I doubt it.
If President Trump thinks we need these tariffs he can seek legislation from Congress.
Posted on 5/28/25 at 8:27 pm to AuburnTigers
quote:
So this court gets to set trade policy for the US and dictate trade terms and conduct foreign policy and whose authority surpasses that of the US president?
No, but it gets to strike down unconstitutional moves from the executive branch overstepping limits on its power.
Posted on 5/28/25 at 8:28 pm to The Egg
quote:civil actions? huh
The United States Court of International Trade, established under Article III of the Constitution, has nationwide jurisdiction over civil actions arising out of the customs and international trade laws of the United States.
Posted on 5/28/25 at 8:30 pm to Lou Pai
Tell me about the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 and the Trade Act of 1974.
Posted on 5/28/25 at 8:31 pm to Lou Pai
quote:rreeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
No, but it gets to strike down unconstitutional moves from the executive branch overstepping limits on its power.
Posted on 5/28/25 at 8:32 pm to the808bass
quote:
So the court is supposed to have nine justices with no more than 5 from one party. Four were appointed by Obama and 2 by Biden. Three by Trump. I’m sure it’s all very judicious.
3 judges heard this case.
1 Obama appointee, 1 Trump appointee, 1 Reagan appointee
Posted on 5/28/25 at 8:34 pm to The Egg
Trump needs to film himself like this:
Posted on 5/28/25 at 8:42 pm to The Egg
1) Congress ceded this authority to the Executive.
2) Tariffs = foreign policy.
This is akin to a state suing the government for imposing sanctions because it would have an adverse economic impact on them.
2) Tariffs = foreign policy.
This is akin to a state suing the government for imposing sanctions because it would have an adverse economic impact on them.
Posted on 5/28/25 at 8:42 pm to the808bass
No I’d rather not. But I think the law you are looking for is the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, which based on my understanding Trump has invoked. He claimed that our trade deficit is a national emergency, and that premise is what underpins the blanket global tariff. That’s skycreamer type of shite (muh climate crisis, muh COVID).
Posted on 5/28/25 at 8:43 pm to The Egg
Who voted for them.
Posted on 5/28/25 at 8:43 pm to The Egg
This will be easily overturned on Appeal …. rookie ruling
Posted on 5/28/25 at 8:44 pm to Lou Pai
Cool. So you’re talking out your arse per usual with Trump. Carry on apace.
Posted on 5/28/25 at 8:47 pm to The Egg
Have to wonder does Congress even want this responsibility?
Posted on 5/28/25 at 8:53 pm to the808bass
Tell it to the judge baw. The Trump appointed one who was a part of this unanimous panel.
Posted on 5/28/25 at 9:02 pm to Lou Pai
Did Obama impose tariffs without Congressional approval?
Biden?
“I don’t know. Tell it to the judge.”
Biden?
“I don’t know. Tell it to the judge.”
Page 4 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News