The White House Ballroom's Imported Steel Shows How Tariffs Encourage Cronyism
Any time government has greater control over commerce, there is an increased incentive to buy off officials or lobby for special treatment.
Any time government has greater control over commerce, there is an increased incentive to buy off officials or lobby for special treatment.
I submitted the brief on behalf of the Cato Institute and myself.
Plus: pro-tech media sells to big tech, Trump's new tariffs, jobs numbers, and more...
The reversal wasn't because the economics changed. It is because their biggest shareholders turned toward industrial policy.
Consider it a boozy, tariff-themed version of "I, Pencil."
Plus: back to the moon, one year since "Liberation Day," birthright citizenship at the Supreme Court, Jonathan lives, and more...
More than 89,000 manufacturing workers lost their jobs in the past year as tariffs caused input prices to rise and squeezed blue-collar industries.
The Trump administration keeps trying to find legal loopholes, but the will of the people is the final judge of any major policy.
There was little rhyme or reason to the president's "emergency" tariffs, which fluctuated wildly depending on his mood.
I was interviewed by Seattle University Law School of Law Dean Tony Varona and Prof. Andrew Siegeil.
Rep. Jimmy Panetta says Democrats have "learned the hard way" that handing over so much tariff authority to the executive branch is a bad idea.
The president is good at backing out of a losing bet—but this time, it's out of his hands.
The president and his new DHS secretary are enraged by jurists and legislators who refuse to toe the party line.
The president says federal courts should not make decisions based on partisan considerations unless it benefits him.
Plus: AI and entitlements, a new Turing prize winner, eight donuts a day, the first trailer for Dune 3, and more...
That’s roughly 12 whole days of government spending.
Plus: Brian Doherty, RIP.
By the administration's logic, Iowa is hurting Arizona by producing so much corn. This is a very silly way to think about economic policy.
The president’s invocation of Section 122 conflates a trade deficit with a balance-of-payments deficit.
LJC is the group with which I worked on the IEEPA tariff case decided by the Supreme Court.
The lawsuit, filed by attorneys general and governors from 24 states, claims that Trump is once again trying "to usurp the taxing power that the Constitution vests in Congress."
The massive new tariffs are illegal, just like the IEEPA tariffs previously invalidated by the Supreme Court.
Even if the refunds are made, business owners say they won't cover all the additional costs created by Trump's chaotic trade policies.
Plus: Congress shrugs, a cat cafe unionizes, and Liz Wolfe checks in, and more...
Importantly, the Court ordered payment of refunds even to those businesses who have not filed a lawsuit to claim them.
The president's wildly inaccurate ideological labels are no more meaningful than his other ad hominem attacks on people who disagree with him.
The Trump administration is trying to avoid paying refunds after illegally collecting $175 billion from its emergency tariff scheme.
I was one of the participants, along with Zach Shemtob (SCOTUSblog) and Julie SIlverbrook (NCC).
Gregg Nunziata interviewed me.
American businesses and consumers absorbed nearly 90 percent of the 2025 tariffs' economic burden, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York found.
Plus: Minnesota Medicaid funds, AI vs. jobs, Taylor Lorenz's libertarian moment, and more...
It said that if it lost in court, it would refund companies that paid unlawful tariffs. Now it says the process could take years.
Former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg discusses immigration enforcement, the role of government, and why federal agencies are losing public trust.
Only time will tell how great the impact of the ruling will really be. But, at this point, it seems like a very significant decision.
Although Trump has other options for taxing imports, the justices reminded him that he needs clear congressional authorization.
A drop in seizures doesn't necessarily mean a decline in the supply.
And that's especially true if the tariffs are illegal.
The article explains why the new Section 122 tariffs are illegal, and courts should strike them down, when (as is likely) lawsuits are filed against them.
The conservative justice’s regrettable opinion in Learning Resources v. Trump.
Plus: The U.S. could be going to war with Iran, the 2026 Winter Olympic Games, and why AI surveillance is worrying civil libertarians
The president is relying on a provision that the government's lawyers said had no "obvious application" to his goal of reducing the trade deficit.
The Court stopped a massive presidential power grab, but did not resolve a crucial issue about judicial review of executive use of emergency powers.
Attorneys for the Trump administration even admitted that Section 122 can't be applied to address trade deficits. Trump is now trying to do that anyway.
An initial take on Learning Resources v. Trump.
Celebrate your independence with a subscription to Reason magazine, your most trusted source of honest, insightful news and analysis.