3 ms·
> there's no "president of Europe" who can unilaterally decide to put a bunch of tariffs on anything imported from the US into Europe without regard to how it a
by petcat 1y ago
> there's no "president of Europe" who can unilaterally decide to put a bunch of tariffs on anything imported from the US into Europe without regard to how it affects the individual member states.
And it's not even clear if it's legal in the US. The Supreme Court is in the process of deciding that after a dozen US states sued about it.
- saghm 1y agoTrue, though we do have a system that apparently lets it go on for a bit even if it does end up getting determined to be illegal (not to mention the track record of the Supreme Court in recent years not exactly inspiring confidence in their impartiality when it comes to policies being decided on a non-partisan basis).
- jshier 1y agoIt's clear that it's not legal, the Supreme Court is simply in the process of deciding whether it can happen anyway.
- saghm 1y agoOne of the larger lessons here is that betting on something happening because the law says it should is not necessarily going to work out every time
- tick_tock_tick 1y agoI mean Congress 100% gave him the power to do the only thing that's going to save us is that so many of the conservative justices are fans of the nondelegation doctrine.
- jshier 1y agoNo, Congress did not give him the power to implement arbitrary tariffs. They allowed limited power for emergency, targeted tariffs of limited duration and scope. This is so far beyond that they're clearly illegal, it's just a matter of whether the courts feel like writing another nonsensical opinion to allow them.
- tick_tock_tick 1y agoYes, emergencies that he determines and they can if they choose to rescind. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it's not exactly what powers they gave him. My hope is the court rules that Congress cannot delegate all its power like it's been doing (nondelegation doctrine) but I'm not going to pretend he wasn't granted these powers.