I just listened to this, and I plan on listening again (there’s terms I’m not familiar with).
Before I listened to this, though, I thought there was no chance for Trump’s tariffs to be upheld by the Supreme Court, but now I’m thinking there actually is a possibility.
I hope the Supreme Court finds that the President’s authority to “regulate importation” includes an authority to impose tariffs.
To me, it sounds logical that it does, but that’s not what the pertinent District Court found before this case made its way to the Supreme Court.
The District Court wanted something in the Constitution that explicitly said the President could impose “tariffs,” and not just that the President can “regulate importation.”
On the other hand, the Court may not allow it, and the Trump administration will have to make some effort to write clear analysis on why the products in question need tariffs, so as to make them “legally” allowed to have tariffs.
(This does not include products with tariffs imposed under regulation 232, as noted in the talk/debate).
I think the tariffs are good for America, and I hope the Supreme Court decides in the Trump administration’s favor. I’m going to listen to this tomorrow, as this is a very important case.
Trump might get more support from the public for the tariffs if he were to issue a rebate before the Court decides (not that I’m counting my money alreadyJust thinking out-loud).
I just listened to this, and I plan on listening again (there’s terms I’m not familiar with).
Before I listened to this, though, I thought there was no chance for Trump’s tariffs to be upheld by the Supreme Court, but now I’m thinking there actually is a possibility.
I hope the Supreme Court finds that the President’s authority to “regulate importation” includes an authority to impose tariffs.
To me, it sounds logical that it does, but that’s not what the pertinent District Court found before this case made its way to the Supreme Court.
The District Court wanted something in the Constitution that explicitly said the President could impose “tariffs,” and not just that the President can “regulate importation.”
On the other hand, the Court may not allow it, and the Trump administration will have to make some effort to write clear analysis on why the products in question need tariffs, so as to make them “legally” allowed to have tariffs.
(This does not include products with tariffs imposed under regulation 232, as noted in the talk/debate).
I think the tariffs are good for America, and I hope the Supreme Court decides in the Trump administration’s favor. I’m going to listen to this tomorrow, as this is a very important case.
Trump might get more support from the public for the tariffs if he were to issue a rebate before the Court decides (not that I’m counting my money alreadyJust thinking out-loud).