The Trump administration has requested the Supreme Court to rule on the legality of his tariff policies, despite rulings against them from two lower federal courts. The petition itself presents factual claims that, if taken seriously, would likely lead the Court to strike down the tariffs under the “major questions doctrine.” However, the Court’s Republican justices have seemingly used this doctrine inconsistently, applying it against Democratic President Biden while potentially seeking a way to exempt Trump. This doctrine has no legal basis and appears to be a tool used selectively to invalidate policies, potentially offering an exception for foreign policy decisions.
Read More
A lawsuit, *V.O.S. Selections v. Trump*, challenges the legality of President Trump’s tariffs before a three-judge panel. The plaintiffs, small import businesses, argue the tariffs violate the “major questions doctrine” due to their significant economic impact, citing a predicted $4,900 reduction in average household income. Support for this claim comes from an amicus brief signed by numerous former Republican officials. The case’s outcome, however, remains uncertain, as the major questions doctrine is novel and its application to presidential actions, especially in foreign policy, is untested.
Read More
While President-elect Trump’s proposed tariffs are unwise, they are not unconstitutional, as federal law grants the president significant power to impose them. The Supreme Court, however, has established a “major questions doctrine” that allows it to veto executive branch actions deemed too ambitious. Given the Court’s recent history of using this doctrine to strike down Biden administration policies, it remains unclear whether they will apply it to Trump’s tariffs, potentially setting a dangerous precedent for future presidents. The upcoming legal battle over tariffs presents a dilemma: a ruling against them would further empower an already powerful Court, while a ruling in favor would cause economic hardship for many Americans.
Read More
John Q. Hosedrinker