The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
I Got 99 Delegations, but a Tariff Ain't One
Words from noted rapper I-Eepa,
as analyzed by Justice Kagan's concurrence in today's tariff decision:
As the principal opinion explains, "regulate" is one of 9 verbs listed in IEEPA's delegation provision. (The others are "investigate," "block," "direct," "compel," "nullify," "void," "prevent," and "prohibit.") Those verbs are followed by 11 objects, each describing a distinct sort of transaction involving foreign property—not just "importation," but also "acquisition," "use," "transfer," and so forth. Combine the verbs and objects in all possible ways, and the statute authorizes 99 actions a President can take to address a foreign threat. And exactly none of the other 98 involves raising revenues.
(Justice Kagan concludes that, therefore, the 99th combination, "regulate" "importation," doesn't authorize raising revenue, either.)
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please to post comments
That seems fair enough, as it goes, but at the same time the idea that "regulate importation" includes "taxing importation" is a lot less crazy than the idea that there is some kind of emergency afoot in the US at the moment. (Other than, obviously, the emergency of the authoritarian takeover of the country.)
Republican senators refused to do their constitutional duty not once but twice…removal wasn’t to only action they could have taken once they had the Articles of Impeachment in their hot little hands. So once they had the AoI 20 Republican senators should have tried to solve as many problems as possible including border security and making sure Trump didn’t run for president again.
Voting for or against an article of impeachment is not an objective truth. If it was, Al Gore would have assumed the presidency.
Republican senators don’t vote for an AoI the House does that. Republican senators were free to use the AoI as leverage over Trump to get him to agree to a grand bargain that included Trump not running again for president.
Impeachment should be two questions; is the act impeachable and did the president do it. The second is an objective fact.
If I-eepa is a rapper, I am pretty sure DUA LIPA is some sort of tax reform bill.
I agree with the overall result. But this particular argument strikes me as a little weak. Taxing all the objects mentioned - acquisition tax, use tax, transfer tax, etc. - all strike me as plausible. And not only that, some of them, like use tax, are real legal terms in common every-day use.
Looks like Trump’s gut was correct about ACB!! McGahn and Leo for the win!!!
Yet we're still having trouble agreeing on the definition of a woman, which would seem to be much simpler. [shrugs]
cc: Kindergarten Cop
MAGAs just can't handle any non-simplistic idea. Medical observation and genetics has shown for decades that "woman" is not a simple concept.
Categorizing all people into male or female does not have any basis in medical science. Same with animals.
A surprisingly important categorization, frequently done in medical science. Try again.
I think you missed the 'all people' bit. That's the important part of what she said!
lol, oh come on.
Mammalian sex is binary.
Gender was allegedly a "social construct", a "social construct" that one is supposedly born with?
You people have to suspend all sorts of basic common understandings of the world around you to believe your trannie nonsense.
After listening to oral argument, I thought the side challanging the tariffs had the better argument just as a matter of statutory interpretation. After reading Kavanaugh's dissent, I think I was wrong about that, as are Kagan, Sotomyor and Jackson. But I gotta go with Gorsuch for the win on the major questions doctrine.
McGahn gets the win…he manipulated Trump into all 3 of these appointments. Of course, in the early days Trump was very easy to manipulate as Trump governed like Jeb up until February 2020 when he surrendered to the Taliban.
The recent tariff override fight illustrates the folly of letting Congress rewrite the constitution without an amendment.
Apparently Gorsuch called out Kagan for her inconsistency on allowing expansive reading by presidents.
It’s ok for Biden but not Trump?
lol.
So the President can ban outright imports from a country, but not impose a tariff?
GHWB did it with “Assault Rifles” in 1989, my $450 Norinco went to $1,500 over night.
Then it went back to $450 when the later Congressional “Assault Weapons Ban” (they weren’t “Assault Weapons”(Select Fire”) and it wasn’t a ban) expired in 2004.
And guessing it was JFK with the Cuban Cigars, (typical “D” he could smoke them but not you)