re: U.S. Court of Appeals of Fed Circuit grants pause over trade court ruling: Tariffs Remain

quote:

---

Riverside
Congress has the “plenary” power to voluntarily relinquish its constitutional authority via legislation.

---

That power is not plenary. Constitutional separation of powers does not allow Congress to give 100% control of one it's powers to the Executive branch. SCOTUS won't allow it. They can come awful close, but any powers Congress delegates to the Executive branch have to come with instructions on how to use those powers; the "intelligible principles" courts rely on.

Given the extreme deference given to POTUS by the CAFC, and it's predecessor court, the CCPA, I do think a partial reversal is likely. It was a summary judgment, and the CAFC may rule that some facts need to be developed.

But I'm not sure Maple Leaf will be the reason. The CIT opinion does its best to avoid violating Maple Leaf. It does not question POTUS' emergency proclamation or decisions, instead relying on statutory interpretation to decide POTUS has acted outside of the authority granted to him by statute.

quote:

---

[T]he Executive’s decisions in the sphere of international trade are reviewable only to determine whether the President’s action falls within his delegated authority, whether the statutory language has been properly construed, and whether the President’s action conforms with the relevant procedural requirements.”); Maple Leaf Fish Co. v. United States, 762 F.2d 86, 89 (Fed. Cir. 1985)

---

I also don't think we can read anything into a stay pending conclusion of the appeals. A stay just makes sense, and is fairly standard in normal civil cases (with the filing if an appeal bond).