If Tariffs are an executive power, why?

Jarod said:
I cannot enumerate them, but the ruling is public and if you have interest in educating yourself you can expend the energy to read it.
Click to expand...
well at least you are honest about your ignorance, and since you can't enumerate them you can't speak intelligently about the topic as to whether he overstepped his bounds or not can you?
 
Teflon Don said:
So you want to go with Option 4?

Here you go Veruca. While the US Constitution does not give the power to tariff to the President, Congress has delegated it to be so three times.

a) Trade Expansion Act of 1962 (Section 232) - authorizes the President to impose tariffs or other trade restrictions if imports threaten national security

b) Trade Act of 1974 (Section 301) - empowers the President to impose tariffs or take other actions in response to unfair trade practices by other countries

c) International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) of 1977 - Grants the President broad authority to regulate commerce during a national emergency that threatens national security, foreign policy or the economy

Why did you only bring up the IEEPA in your shit post and not there other acts passed by Congress?

Were you not aware of them? Being deliberately misleading?


​

Click to expand...
“threatens national security” is the key there, yes Congress has given the Executive Branches that power when there exists a “threat to national security,” and the times it was issued, it was issued to cover specific defined situations

The Court is questioning what is the national security threat now that merits use of a blanket application. And it makes sense, the US currently enjoys, and has for some time now, the greatest and most prosperous economy in the world, so want is the justification for Congress surrendering it’s authority for Trump to issue tariffs across the board
 
Teflon Don said:
So are you saying that the only thing that anyone can do has to come straight from the Constitution? If it isn't explicitly in the US Constitution it shouldn't be done?

There was nothing explicit in the US Constitution saying the Supreme Court gets to interpret the US Constitution, but they gave themselves that power.

Are you sure you want to continue down this road Veruca? I know you think you landed on some unassailable talking point, but I don't think this is going to end the way you think it will
Click to expand...
You do realize that you are undermining a basic understanding of many conservatives, that if it ain’t in the Constitution, it is not allowed
 
archives said:
“threatens national security” is the key there, yes Congress has given the Executive Branches that power when there exists a “threat to national security,” and the times it was issued, it was issued to cover specific defined situations

The Court is questioning what is the national security threat now that merits use of a blanket application. And it makes sense, the US currently enjoys, and has for some time now, the greatest and most prosperous economy in the world, so want is the justification for Congress surrendering it’s authority for Trump to issue tariffs across the board
Click to expand...
You didn’t read all of what I posted did you? Or you didn’t understand it
 
Teflon Don said:
While the US Constitution does not give the power to tariff to the President, Congress has delegated it to be so three times.
Click to expand...
If Congress passed a law delegating powers to trump, then the judicial branch has the obligation to judge that laws implementation. The claim that it is an absolute power of trump has completely fallen apart.
 
If Congress didn't want the Executive to use emergency tariff powers, they should have voted to remove the legislation that gave him that authority. pResident Braindead Autopen would have signed it.
 
Damocles said:
If Congress didn't want the Executive to use emergency tariff powers, they should have voted to remove the legislation that gave him that authority. pResident Braindead Autopen would have signed it.
Click to expand...
Never had to, prior Presidents and Congresses knew it’s intend was meant to only address situations that actually threatened national security, and as we know, the current Congress couldn’t move fast enough to surrender their authority if Trump demanded it
 
archives said:
Never had to, prior Presidents and Congresses knew it’s intend was meant to only address situations that actually threatened national security, and as we know, the current Congress couldn’t move fast enough to surrender their authority if Trump demanded it
Click to expand...
There are three acts of Congress that give the President broad authority over tariffs. It isn't JUST national security. Did you not know that? Are you ignorant of that fact?

Trump will win this
 
Walt said:
If Congress passed a law delegating powers to trump, then the judicial branch has the obligation to judge that laws implementation. The claim that it is an absolute power of trump has completely fallen apart.
Click to expand...
Interesting considering the laws have been around and used since 1962 and 1977

Nice try. Quit while you are behind
 
The laws delegating tariff authority under specific circumstances have never been used. Step one is checking whether Congress can actuall cede that power to the executive. Step two is justifying the circumstances. He cannot do that on his whims.
 
Teflon Don said:
There are three acts of Congress that give the President broad authority over tariffs. It isn't JUST national security. Did you not know that? Are you ignorant of that fact?

Trump will win this
Click to expand...
But the other two are indirectly related to threats to national security, and none of that “broad authority” gives the President blanket authority over tariffs
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top