This column will attempt to do the impossible: make the Trump/Supreme Court situation understandable and interesting.
If you want to be socially shunned, bring up the tariff controversy in any gathering. Eyes will glaze over, even your friends will excuse themselves.
Nevertheless, we are undaunted.
President Trump believes that economic pressure on foreign countries can protect the USA from dangerous behavior. China is the best example. Carrot and stick. If Beijing doesn’t promote chaos, it gets better trade opportunities in America.
If it misbehaves, the Trump administration imposes tariff penalties, thereby harming China’s economy.
The President says he has the legal right to do this under the “national security” banner. He is protecting Americans by economic strategy rather than using military might.
Dissenters say Trump’s vision is unconstitutional because the founding document gives Congress over “foreign commerce.” That’s true, but the Constitution also gives the President powers when the nation is in danger, which Mr. Trump believes it is.
Backup: $37 trillion dollar debt, major trade deficit with foreign countries that damages our economic well-being, thereby making the country weaker.
The Supreme Court, 6-3, ruled against President Trump.
Now, I believe politics had something to do with the decision. Honest jurists could rule either way. National security is certainly involved with international trade, and tariffs can be used to stop mayhem that might harm America.
The Justices know this. However, my take is that the six voting against Trump want to rein in his power. They see the President as over the line, ignoring the constitutional separation of powers.
That is the key to the tariff ruling.
President Trump has already announced 15 percent tariffs across the board, which he legally can do under trade law Section 122.
The Supreme Court will not interfere with that or other nuanced trade deals because it’s already sent its most important message: Respect the Constitutional process.
So that’s it. There’s a personal twist to the tariff ruling, which took far longer than it should have. Might have been because the Justices kept falling asleep during deliberations. Drowsy topic for sure, but important.
Summing up: President Trump will be able to continue carrying a big stick on trade. He has three years to demonstrate that his national security vision is a positive not only for the USA but for the world.
I’m betting Mr. Trump is on the side of the angels.
If you want to be socially shunned, bring up the tariff controversy in any gathering. Eyes will glaze over, even your friends will excuse themselves.
Nevertheless, we are undaunted.
President Trump believes that economic pressure on foreign countries can protect the USA from dangerous behavior. China is the best example. Carrot and stick. If Beijing doesn’t promote chaos, it gets better trade opportunities in America.
If it misbehaves, the Trump administration imposes tariff penalties, thereby harming China’s economy.
The President says he has the legal right to do this under the “national security” banner. He is protecting Americans by economic strategy rather than using military might.
Dissenters say Trump’s vision is unconstitutional because the founding document gives Congress over “foreign commerce.” That’s true, but the Constitution also gives the President powers when the nation is in danger, which Mr. Trump believes it is.
Backup: $37 trillion dollar debt, major trade deficit with foreign countries that damages our economic well-being, thereby making the country weaker.
The Supreme Court, 6-3, ruled against President Trump.
Now, I believe politics had something to do with the decision. Honest jurists could rule either way. National security is certainly involved with international trade, and tariffs can be used to stop mayhem that might harm America.
The Justices know this. However, my take is that the six voting against Trump want to rein in his power. They see the President as over the line, ignoring the constitutional separation of powers.
That is the key to the tariff ruling.
President Trump has already announced 15 percent tariffs across the board, which he legally can do under trade law Section 122.
The Supreme Court will not interfere with that or other nuanced trade deals because it’s already sent its most important message: Respect the Constitutional process.
So that’s it. There’s a personal twist to the tariff ruling, which took far longer than it should have. Might have been because the Justices kept falling asleep during deliberations. Drowsy topic for sure, but important.
Summing up: President Trump will be able to continue carrying a big stick on trade. He has three years to demonstrate that his national security vision is a positive not only for the USA but for the world.
I’m betting Mr. Trump is on the side of the angels.
Sign up to be a Premium or Concierge Member on BillOReilly.com to get the best reporting - honest news and analysis is vital. Sign up here.
