President Trump’s tariff war waged in the name of a national emergency over fentanyl imports is an abuse of power.

 

In an unprecedented move, President Trump justified the imposition of tariffs on Canada. China, and Mexico under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) based on an “extraordinary threat” from illegal immigration and drug trafficking.

 

The problem for the president, however, is that IEEPA does not explicitly grant tariff authority at all—indeed, the words “duty” or “tariff” appear nowhere in the statute—and to the extent that it grants power to restrict imports, it requires that there be a direct connection between the action taken (here, broad-based tariffs) and a properly declared national emergency (here, migrants and fentanyl crossing the southern border). But there is no direct connection between tariffs on imports of all goods—no matter how innocent or far removed from fentanyl—and the declared national emergency. <SKIP>

 

The words “tariff’ or “duty” appear nowhere in the statute, in contrast to other laws in which Congress has clearly delegated tariff authority (such as Section 301, specifically authorizing “duties” to respond to unjustifiable acts that burden U.S. commerce; or Section 201, permitting “duties” or “tariff-rate quotas” to respond to a surge in imports that seriously injures a U.S. industry). Indeed, the most commonly used additional tariffs (antidumping and countervailing duties) are imposed following detailed procedures focused on calculating the appropriate level of duties along with developing a formal record of the factual predicate for such duties.

 

https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/trump-s-use-of-emergency-powers-to-impose-tariffs-is-an-abuse-of-power

 

Seems to me as a lay person he loves to do illegal stuff tie it up in court as he runs amok getting away with it for as long as possible.plus with the free pass the Supreme Court gave him he knows he’s untouchable legally as far as I understand it.

The analysis in the OP comes from an affiliate of the Brookings Institution.

Seems to me, if Trump has carte blanche to create tariffs, he wouldn't have had to invoke the IEEPA to do so.

1 hour ago, jerrymahoney said:

The analysis in the OP comes from an affiliate of the Brookings Institution.

Seems to me, if Trump has carte blanche to create tariffs, he wouldn't have had to invoke the IEEPA to do so.

Unfortunately, the US has a Supreme Court that treats the presidency as though were a kingship.

There is a lawsuit recently brought that states the law being used to impose tariffs ONLY allows for embargoes, NOT tariffs. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

1 hour ago, placeholder said:

Unfortunately, the US has a Supreme Court that treats the presidency as though were a kingship.

He has 4 votes pretty much in-the-pocket but Roberts maybe not so and Barrett could end up being his David Souter.