Presidential Tariffs Are Against The Law

[Lesh]

I shall now, for the 15,986th time, address your ignorance.

How Congress delegates its tariff powers to the president | Constitution Center

President Donald Trump is expected to announce wide-sweeping tariffs on Wednesday, in a move with potentially broad consequences. So how does the president have the ability to levy tariffs under the Constitution?

constitutioncenter.org

You are welcome.

I guess you didn’t read that

Some laws deal with Existing tariffs… not new ones

Others deal with reciprocal tariffs

And the last deals with emergencies

None apply to what Trump is doing

 

[Independent thinker]

Lol. I am consistently ANTI-Trump.

I thought you were claiming I changed positions.

You’re so confused

LOL. We all knew you were consistently anti-Trump, that was the point. If the stock market does down you say it is Trump's fault but if the stock market goes up you don't say it is because of Trump. That's a change in viewpoint.

 

[Lesh]

LOL. We all knew you were consistently anti-Trump, that was the point. If the stock market does down you say it is Trump's fault but if the stock market goes up you don't say it is because of Trump. That's a change in viewpoint.

Quote me doing that. You really are confused

 

[Frankenstein]

The new tactic democrats are using is that Trump's tariffs are against the law and that only Congress can issue tariffs, not the president by himself. So, of course, democrats have presented several legal challenges against Trump imposing tariffs without the consent of Congress. Now, if I remember correctly, presidents have been imposing tariffs for centuries, including recently with Joe Biden and now, all of a sudden, presidential tariffs are illegal? The precedent has already been set many times over hundreds of years and no one has ever challenged it until TDS infected half the country.

Well if you were receiving kickbacks from other countries to keep them from being ta-riffed your would sue also,

 

[kyzr]

I believe I said the exact opposite. Can you read?

You need to read post #5 again. Shoots the OP and thread title in the ass.

 

[Lesh]

I guess you didn’t read that

Some laws deal with Existing tariffs… not new ones

Others deal with reciprocal tariffs

And the last deals with emergencies

None apply to what Trump is doing

Responded to post #5

 

[Independent thinker]

Quote me doing that. You really are confused

You are not worth my time. Let's just leave it at both you and I agree you are nothing but anti-Trump through and through, whether he does good or whether he does bad.

 

[Independent thinker]

Well if you were receiving kickbacks from other countries to keep them from being ta-riffed your would sue also,

What is a kickback?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Responded to post #5

Yes. You chose to remain ignorant.

 

[bendog]

I guess you didn’t read that

Some laws deal with Existing tariffs… not new ones

Others deal with reciprocal tariffs

And the last deals with emergencies

None apply to what Trump is doing

I thought the state challenges had to do with
"The lawsuit also claims that tariffs are not connected to any specific "unusual and extraordinary" threat, as required under IEEPA, which the Trump administration cited as its authority. The states claim the tariffs will significantly raise consumer prices, drive inflation, lead to job losses, and create widespread economic instability."

MSN

It may be that Trump's the first potus to try and claw away from a cowardly congress power through emergency powers. But the states would have to show the tariffs are not legally authorized. And I don't see that as a winner.

 

[Care4all]

Congress has something like 14 legislative days to vote and reject or accept the new presidential tariffs.

To prevent Congress from taking this vote within the 14 days as required....

Mike Johnson slipped into another bill that repubs passed, that now thru the end of the year is just ONE congressional, legislative day. Preventing Congressional check on presidential tariffs from being rejected before the 14day requirement....yep, the 200 days left in the year, Congress is cheating and saying it is just 1 day. Something like this is going on.

 

[M14 Shooter]

I thought the state challenges had to do with
"The lawsuit also claims that tariffs are not connected to any specific "unusual and extraordinary" threat, as required under IEEPA, which the Trump administration cited as its authority. The states claim the tariffs will significantly raise consumer prices, drive inflation, lead to job losses, and create widespread economic instability."

MSN

It may be that Trump's the first potus to try and claw away from a cowardly congress power through emergency powers. But the states would have to show the tariffs are not legally authorized. And I don't see that as a winner.

The Trump team did their homework, both here and with DOGE - there's little question they have the legal authority to do what they are doing.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Congress has something like 14 legislative days to vote and reject or accept the new presidential tariffs.

Cite?

 

[Care4all]

Cite?

April 10, 2025

What if you could prolong today to avoid making an uncomfortable decision tomorrow?

For most human beings, that’s not possible. But in the alternate reality that is Congress, which operates according to its own arcane rules and precedents and is exempt from the statutes that bind the rest of us, a day can be as long or short as the laws of political gravity demand.

That is how it came to pass that House Republicans in recent weeks declared the rest of the year one long day when it came to considering a challenge to President Trump’s tariffs. They would prefer to avoid votes on whether to scrap the levies, but the law says the House must consider them within a set period of time.

The obvious solution? Stop time.

It was hardly the first time congressional leaders have meddled with the laws of the universe for the sake of political expediency. By bending legislative time, House and Senate leaders have long found ways to buy themselves wiggle room for negotiation, preserve their prerogatives and shield their members from votes they would rather not have...

Speaker Mike Johnson’s recent efforts to freeze time have been more conspicuous — and longer lasting. Last month, he quietly pushed through a provision that contained a calendar gimmick ensuring that no lawmaker could force a vote this year to end Mr. Trump’s tariffs on Canada, China and Mexico. He used the same trick on Wednesday to head off a vote until at least October on the global tariffs Mr. Trump announced last week and then partially paused.

The first measure stated that “each day for the remainder of the 119th Congress shall not constitute a calendar day” for the purposes of the emergency Mr. Trump declared on Feb. 1 to impose the tariffs on Canada, China and Mexico. The resolution approved on Wednesday used the same language to stop any member from forcing a vote on the rest of Mr. Trump’s tariffs through Sept. 30.
...

“When is a day not a day?” Representative Thomas Massie of Kentucky, who was the only G.O.P. member to oppose both moves, wrote on social media. “Answer: when Congress circumvents the law requiring a vote on Presidential National Emergencies within 15 days.”

Democrats were also outraged.

“Republicans changed how time itself works in the House to prevent a vote on tariffs that is allowed under the law,” said Representative Jim McGovern, Democrat of Massachusetts.

In Congress, a Day Can Last Months if Politics Demands It

House Republicans are so intent on avoiding tough votes on President Trump’s tariffs that they have rewritten the calendar.

www.nytimes.com

 

[Frankenstein]

What is a kickback?

a payment made to someone who has facilitated a transaction or appointment, especially illicitly.
"the ruling party depends on contributions and kickbacks"

 

[kyzr]

What is a kickback?

I'll give you $375b if you "donate" $1b back to me.

Exclusive | $375B EPA slush fund handled by John Podesta gave billions to charities founded only months earlier

The EPA gave out $20 billion to environmental justice and green credit groups that had barely registered with the IRS.

nypost.com

 

[Independent thinker]

a payment made to someone who has facilitated a transaction or appointment, especially illicitly.
"the ruling party depends on contributions and kickbacks"

What does that mean? Can you give specifics of your accusations?

 

[Independent thinker]

I shall now, for the 15,986th time, address your ignorance.

How Congress delegates its tariff powers to the president | Constitution Center

President Donald Trump is expected to announce wide-sweeping tariffs on Wednesday, in a move with potentially broad consequences. So how does the president have the ability to levy tariffs under the Constitution?

constitutioncenter.org

You are welcome.

He is a fact denier and he is consistent in that.

 

[Independent thinker]

Congress has something like 14 legislative days to vote and reject or accept the new presidential tariffs.

To prevent Congress from taking this vote within the 14 days as required....

Mike Johnson slipped into another bill that repubs passed, that now thru the end of the year is just ONE congressional, legislative day. Preventing Congressional check on presidential tariffs from being rejected before the 14day requirement....yep, the 200 days left in the year, Congress is cheating and saying it is just 1 day. Something like this is going on.

So, you're admitting that it was all legal, just as democrats have said with many things.

 

[Care4all]

So, you're admitting that it was all legal, just as democrats have said with many things.

No. See post 34.