Justices Don't Buy Tariff Argument

[neurosis]

Curious what everyone thinks about this and where it's going to go.

Personally, I can't believe that anyone who considers themselves a "conservative" has been on board with the expansion of executive power, but here we are. Almost no true conservatives left.

I keep seeing arguments being made that the tariffs may be "too big to fail" at this point. How does that play out?

"Justice Neil Gorsuch stated that accepting the Trump administration's logic and the powers they've assumed would result in "a one-way ratchet toward the gradual but continual accretion of power in the executive branch and away from the people's elected representatives.""

https://reason.com/2025/11/06/justices-dont-buy-tariff-argument/


Please keep this thread insult free if that's possible. 

[Smit]

Curious what everyone thinks about this and where it's going to go.

Personally, I can't believe that anyone who considers themselves a "conservative" has been on board with the expansion of executive power, but here we are. Almost no true conservatives left.

I keep seeing arguments being made that the tariffs may be "too big to fail" at this point. How does that play out?

"Justice Neil Gorsuch stated that accepting the Trump administration's logic and the powers they've assumed would result in "a one-way ratchet toward the gradual but continual accretion of power in the executive branch and away from the people's elected representatives.""

https://reason.com/2025/11/06/justices-dont-buy-tariff-argument/

Please keep this thread insult free if that's possible. 

I find it curious that SCOTUS finds this a dangerous precedent when they've fallen all over themselves to enable him to grab power with "emergencies" the entire course of his reign so far.

Trump will find other ways to do what he wants. Republicans in congress will not do anything to fulfill their constitutional duty to provide a balance to the executive branch.

[neurosis]

I find it curious that SCOTUS finds this a dangerous precedent when they've fallen all over themselves to enable him to grab power with "emergencies" the entire course of his reign so far.

The power of the shadow docket. No precedence set and no accountability. Just fucking rubber-stamping an agenda.

What's going on in this Country right now is beyond crazy.

[CNCAppsJames]

Curious what everyone thinks about this and where it's going to go.

Personally, I can't believe that anyone who considers themselves a "conservative" has been on board with the expansion of executive power...

I've long thought that the legislative branch has actually been the bad actor in this situation we find ourselves in. Humor me for a second.

So, we have 3 branches or government, each one has it's own set of powers/responsibilities. They are for the most part laid out in The Constitution pretty well. Stripping away all the minutiae; Congress writes the laws (Legislative Branch), SCOTUS and the Courts interpret/enforce the laws (Judicial Branch), POTUS runs the Government (Executive Branch). Again, there's more to it that that, but that's the basics.

For decades, the legislative branch for the most part has ceded much of it's power to the Judicial Branch. Roe v. Wade is the perfect, and epic example of their lack of spine to do the hard things - they had decades to get the states to call a Constitutional Convention so that would ACTUALLY enshrine that right into the Constitution - they chose to kick the can. Fine. Now it's a state's right to allow/disallow. Which is what I've said all along that it should be. So the Legislative Branch are the spineless turds of the three branches, and brother, that ain't gonna change in our lifetimes. Absence of power creates a vacuum.

For longer than we've had a spineless legislative branch, we've had an activist Judicial Branch... some call it legislating from the bench. I think that is an appropriate description of the situation. Not because I agree/disagree with decisions, but because the Constitution is written in such a way that it does not take someone with a JD to interpret it. Sure you should probably have amendment period specific dictionaries on had because the meanings of many words have changed over time. Other than that, things are pretty plain. Some say the "Constitution is a living document". Those people are fools. It is not a living document. Justice Antonin Scalia once said "It says what it says, and it doesn't say anything else."

Finally the Executive Branch. When it comes to "running" the government, this is the executive branch's domain. Period. End of story. Congress funds it, POTUS runs it, SCOTUS keeps it in check. If we think of this in terms of how a healthy company should run, by that, do not mistake this statement to mean I think the Executive Branch is healthy because I most certainly do not - for reasons I will outline below. The federal government is bloated. It has taken control over things over many generations that it has no business even being involved with. I've often mentioned shutting down specific government agencies. Too often to count. We have entrenched, unelected bureaucrats acting on their own, with barely any oversight if they have any oversight at all.

I could seriously write a thesis paper on this, but it would be pointless. Nobody is going to change their mind or even "see" the point no matter how well reasoned and researched my points are. So I'm content leaving this as it is.

[neurosis]

Finally the Executive Branch. When it comes to "running" the government, this is the executive branch's domain. Period. End of story. Congress funds it, POTUS runs it, SCOTUS keeps it in check.

Isn't congress also responsible for writing laws?

We're living under executive rule right now. Is that really how you think government is supposed to be run?

[Jeff]

Just fucking rubber-stamping an agenda.

What's going on in this Country right now is beyond crazy.

I notice there's no mention of what happened the last 4 years and the shit show that came out of that.
But since Trump is in office NOW things are crazy?

[neurosis]

I notice there's no mention of what happened the last 4 years and the shit show that came out of that.
But since Trump is in office NOW things are crazy?

Write out a comparison and I'll tell you what I think of every example.

[Bucky Cornstarch]

The cool thing is that any conservative who opposes this massive power grab and march towards fascism is called a RINO by the Trumptards.

[Jeff]

Write out a comparison and I'll tell you what I think of every example.

Everything they did was rubber stamping their agenda.
Let's start with open borders and the midnight planes flying illegals all over the country.

[neurosis]

Finally the Executive Branch. When it comes to "running" the government, this is the executive branch's domain. Period. End of story. Congress funds it, POTUS runs it, SCOTUS keeps it in check.

A simpler question, since Congress is responsible for the purse.  Should Trump be able to unilaterally impost tariffs, in your opinion?

[neurosis]

The cool thing is that any conservative who opposes this massive power grab and march towards fascism is called a RINO by the Trumptards.

I'm called a fence sitter.  lol.

When I started talking on this forum (emc anyway) almost 20 years ago, I watched the right, which I was a part of, become nothing like the right I considered myself a part of.

[YoDoug]

https://share.google/aimode/Z0hbAlHI8Twqf0gl0

A simpler question, since Congress is responsible for the purse.  Should Trump be able to unilaterally impost tariffs, in your opinion?

From Gemini it sounds like the process has become rather convoluted and easily left open to interpretation and argument.

The legal process to impose new tariffs typically begins with Congress, which has the constitutional power to set them, but has delegated significant authority to the President. The President can initiate a tariff imposition by directing an executive agency, like the Department of Commerce, to conduct an investigation under specific statutes such as Section 232 (for national security) or Section 301 (for unfair trade practices). These investigations involve a public comment period, and upon completion, the President can impose tariffs through a proclamation if the investigation finds they are necessary.
Key steps in the presidential process
Initiate an investigation: A relevant executive agency, such as the Department of Commerce, must first open an investigation into whether certain imported goods threaten national security or engage in unfair trade practices.
Gather information and public comment: The investigating agency will conduct its review and open a public comment period to allow businesses and stakeholders to provide input.
Submit a report: The agency has a set period, such as 270 days for Section 232, to complete its investigation and submit a report with its findings to the President.
Presidential decision: The President has a specific timeframe, like 90 days after receiving the report, to decide on the appropriate action.
Impose tariffs: If tariffs are the chosen "remedy," the President will issue a proclamation that specifies the targeted products and the new tariff rates.
Constitutional role of Congress
Primary authority: The U.S. Constitution grants Congress the power to levy taxes and regulate foreign commerce.
Delegation of power: Congress has passed laws that allow the President to exercise this power in specific circumstances, which is how much of the current tariff law operates.
Congressional oversight: While the President can impose tariffs through executive authority, Congress can pass legislation to stop them, though this would likely require a veto-proof majority.

[neurosis]

From Gemini it sounds like the process has become rather convoluted and easily left open to interpretation and argument.

Read through the sources for that explanation and tell me what YOU think.

[neurosis]

Or what do you think of Neil Gorsuch's comment, who is a textualist.

"Justice Neil Gorsuch stated that accepting the Trump administration's logic and the powers they've assumed would result in "a one-way ratchet toward the gradual but continual accretion of power in the executive branch and away from the people's elected representatives.""

[YoDoug]

Or what do you think of Neil Gorsuch's comment, who is a textualist.

"Justice Neil Gorsuch stated that accepting the Trump administration's logic and the powers they've assumed would result in "a one-way ratchet toward the gradual but continual accretion of power in the executive branch and away from the people's elected representatives.""

First, I'm not defending Trump's logic tariffs, nor and I rejecting it. I honestly haven't been paying attention.

As for Gorsuch, I agree the power of the executive branch is getting too big, not just Trump though, Biden went too far as well. However, I also see how a completely dysfunctional legislature leads to executive overreach. Look at the current BS games over the government shutdown. The refusal of the left and right to negotiate for anything and stick to their extremes causses executive overreach. If they were doing their jobs presidents would be busy doing their duties and wouldn't need to try to do everything by executive power.