HELD: IEEPA does not authorize the President to impose tariffs

The US Supreme Court ruled 6-3 today that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) does not let the OAFPOTUS impose taxes:

The President asserts the extraordinary power to unilaterally impose tariffs of unlimited amount, duration, and scope. In light of the breadth, history, and constitutional context of that asserted authority, he must identify clear congressional authorization to exercise it.

IEEPA’s grant of authority to “regulate . . . importation” falls short. IEEPA contains no reference to tariffs or duties. The Government points to no statute in which Congress used the word “regulate” to authorize taxation. And until now no President has read IEEPA to confer such power.

We claim no special competence in matters of economics or foreign affairs. We claim only, as we must, the limited role assigned to us by Article III of the Constitution. Fulfilling that role, we hold that IEEPA does not authorize the President to impose tariffs.

Chief Justice Roberts (R) wrote the opinion that the independent and Democratic justices signed on to. Justices Kavanaugh (R), Thomas (R), and Alito (R) dissented, as was their duty to the Republican Party for which they stand.

Josh Marshall says "don't be fooled:"

Indeed, today’s decision is actually an indictment of the Court. These tariffs have been in effect for almost a year. They have upended whole sectors of the U.S. and global economies. The fact that a president can illegally exercise such powers for so long and with such great consequences for almost a year means we’re not living in a functional constitutional system. If the Constitution allows untrammeled and dictatorial powers for almost one year, massive dictator mulligans, then there is no Constitution.

The Court also allowed the tariffs to remain in place while the government appealed the appellate decision striking down the tariffs back in August. Let me repeat that: back in August, almost six months ago.

In other words, most of the time in which these illegal tariffs were in effect was because of that needless stay. The logic of the stay was that deference to President’s claim of illegal powers was more important than the harm created by hundreds of billions in unconstitutional taxes being imposed on American citizens. It’s a good example of what law professor Leah Litman — one of the most important voices on the Court’s corruption — earlier this morning called the Court’s corruption via “passivity,” empowering anti-constitutional actions through deciding not to act at all or encouraging endless delays it could easily put a stop to in the interests of the constitutional order.

Paul Krugman argues that "the tariff ruling really matters:"

Trump’s invocation of IEEPA wasn’t about average tariff rates, or revenue. It wasn’t even about the trade deficit, which, by the way, hasn’t declined at all since he went on his tariff spree.

No, it was all about arbitrary power. Trump has reveled in being able to slap tariffs on Brazil for daring to put Jair Bolsonaro on trial for a failed insurrection, being able to threaten France and Germany with tariffs for getting in the way of his attempt to seize Greenland, and of course giving tariff waivers to businesses that help him build his ballroom.

The desire for that arbitrary power is why he went for IEEPA despite warnings that it might well be ruled unconstitutional.

No wonder, then, that he’s throwing a huge temper tantrum.

The government must now refund some $120 billion from the illegal tariffs, much of that going to hedge funds who bought the refund rights from small businesses who couldn't survive without the cash. Because even when he loses, the OAFPOTUS still does tremendous damage to almost everyone.