SCOTUS Is Behaving Like "Arm of the MAGA Trump Presidency," Says Legal Expert

"The Supreme Court heard oral arguments this week in a case challenging President Donald Trump's tariffs, with plaintiffs arguing that his unilateral levies on imported goods violate the Constitution, which grants Congress the power to impose taxes and regulate foreign commerce. The Trump administration has justified his unprecedented use of tariffs under a 1977 law known as the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, but several justices seemed highly skeptical of that argument, potentially putting President Trump's signature economic policy at risk."

"We're staying on the subject of the Supreme Court but now turning to a major case before the court on President Trump's authority to impose sweeping tariffs on foreign goods. The court heard oral arguments on Wednesday. Solicitor General John Sauer argued President Trump has the power to unilaterally impose the tariffs under a 1977 law known as the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA, which grants the president the authority to regulate commerce during wartime or other national emergencies. This is the solicitor general arguing."

""There is no genuine emergency. There is no war that is the precipitating basis for invoking IEEPA. And even if it were, it would not allow the imposition of tariffs," says legal expert Lisa Graves, founder of True North Research and co-host of the podcast Legal AF. Graves also discusses her new book, Without Precedent: How Chief Justice Roberts and His Accomplices Rewrote the Constitution and Dismantled Our Rights."

The Supreme Court considered whether President Trump's unilateral tariffs exceed constitutional limits by usurping Congress's exclusive power to tax and regulate foreign commerce. Plaintiffs contend the tariffs violate the Constitution because only Congress may impose such levies. The administration invoked the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977 to justify the tariffs as emergency measures granting presidential authority to regulate commerce. Several justices expressed skepticism about applying IEEPA to authorize tariffs without a genuine emergency. Legal observers noted the absence of war or comparable emergency and argued IEEPA would not permit tariff imposition even if an emergency existed.

Read at Truthout