View Single Post
  #37 (permalink)  
Old 03-23-2018, 09:41 AM
AZRWinger AZRWinger is offline
Conservative Sage
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
Posts: 16,665
Thanks: 9,696
Thanked 10,227 Times in 6,231 Posts
Send a message via ICQ to AZRWinger
Default Re: Trump says U.S. to impose hefty tariffs on steel, aluminum imports

Originally Posted by mr wonder View Post
Somehow I suspect that in your reading of the 2nd amendment and other parts of the constitution you tend to look at general principals and the clear language of various other SCOTUS rulings as being definitive and even general.
there's really no other honest way to approach the Constitution. It's a short doc. It's a framework that all laws fall under... are subject too... must align with.

But Hey, enjoy your ad hoc narrow style of interpretation where there are no general principals and some words of the constitution and SCOTUS only apply on the 3rd Tuesday if it's raining.
Many democrats interpret the constitution the same way. A "living" document and all. only means what they say it means... today.

So we'll just disagree then AZ.
But again, i hope you never whine the next time a Democrat CiC asserts that:
various laws, in combo with a presidential change in regs or executive orders simply override the plain text of the constitution.

There's nothing you've sited as justifying the Trumps actions that can't be repeated and applied on any other issue.
Tariffs, climate change, gun laws, immigration, drug laws, abortion, white collar crime, murder, robbery, terrorism, food regs, manufacturing regs, enviro regs, speech, surveillance, assembly, religion, private property, imminent domain, travel, taxes, health care, war, etc etc etc..

"national security" and a few random laws and BAM, Any president can make just changes.
AZ says that's always been "constitutional". Ever since the Barberry Pirates.

But to me, It's clearly just another lame and unconstitutional Presidential overreach of powers.
the constitution simply says.
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, (tariffs) Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties (tariffs), Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
... To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;...

seems fairly clear to me that the President does not have the constitutional authority. Only the congress does.
But I'm told I'm reading and "interpreting" those few words with rabid grandiose hysterical bluster.

carry on

(constitution is pretty nice maybe some other nations would like to use it, we aren't anymore)
I note the absence of any further attempt to use restraints of the state to revise contracts as somehow definitive for the President's authority to impose tariffs on support of national security.

The second amendment is a negative right, Congress shall make no laws. But the injunction is limited to firearms and related considerations. It's not relevant to the President's authority to impose tariffs or a state barring foreclosures for 2 years on existing mortgages.
What is a 30 something year old single man with a rock in one hand and a Honduran flag in the other?

An asylum seeker.
Reply With Quote