Political Wrinkles  

Go Back   Political Wrinkles > Political Forums > Economics
Register FAQDonate PW Store PW Trivia Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Economics Discuss Trump says U.S. to impose hefty tariffs on steel, aluminum imports at the Political Forums; Originally Posted by Bat Kind of like the automobile tariffs. The EU has a 12% tariff on USA imported autos. ...

Reply
 
Share LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21 (permalink)  
Old 03-18-2018, 09:21 AM
ShivaTD's Avatar
Progressive Libertarian
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Immigrant to Arizona
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,221
Thanks: 1,439
Thanked 2,203 Times in 1,744 Posts
Default Re: Trump says U.S. to impose hefty tariffs on steel, aluminum imports

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bat View Post
Kind of like the automobile tariffs.
The EU has a 12% tariff on USA imported autos. The USA has a 2% tariff on EU imported autos. Perhaps the USA should should mirror that tariff for fairness.
Actually I believe that's a 10% tariff on automobiles exported to the EU and a 2% tariff on automobiles exported from the EU to the US but the point is made.

We need to remember something else. Mercedes Benz assemblies many of it's popular models for the US market in Vance, Alabama and in Ladson, South Carolina. BMW assembles many of it's popular models in Greer, South Carolina. Fiat assembles the 500 and 500C for the US market in Toluca, Mexico and not in the EU. None of these cars are subject to a tariff being imposed. If the US manufacturers don't want to have the 10% tariff imposed all they have to do is open assembly plants in the EU like the European car makers have done for the US market. That's a business decision of the manufacturers and not an issue for the US government.

We should also remember that while the US does have a trade deficit related to manufactured goods with the EU we have a trade surplus when it comes to services we provide to the EU. Why wouldn't we take that which we do well, providing services where we have a trade surplus, and expand that to create an overall trade surplus instead of addressing manufacturing where we're not able to compete? In enterprise it's always best to base the business model upon what you do best because that's where the money is. When it comes to the US and EU it's the providing of services, not goods, that the US excels at.
__________________
"I always had a rule, if a restaurant is dirty on the outside, it's dirty on the inside." Donald Trump

"I always had a rule, if the White House is dirty on the inside, it's dirty on the outside." ShivaTD

Based upon the corruption, brutality, inhumanity, immorality, dishonesty, and incompetence of the Trump administration the White House is the dirtiest house in America and there's no known cleanser that with remove the stains of the Trump Administration.
Reply With Quote
  #22 (permalink)  
Old 03-18-2018, 09:35 AM
ShivaTD's Avatar
Progressive Libertarian
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Immigrant to Arizona
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,221
Thanks: 1,439
Thanked 2,203 Times in 1,744 Posts
Default Re: Trump says U.S. to impose hefty tariffs on steel, aluminum imports

Quote:
Originally Posted by AZRWinger View Post
From the NYT, so utterly lacking in respect for our President it refers to him as Mr.

Quote:
Mr. Trump’s authority to impose such sweeping tariffs stems from a Commerce Department investigation that concluded last month that imported metal threatened national security by degrading the American industrial base. The administration has said it wants to combat cheap metals flooding into the United States, particularly from China
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2018/03/0...p-tariffs.html

The Department of Commerce study, link to download in the article, concluded that foreign dumping steel and aluminum in the US market posed a threat to US national security. Contrary to the belief of Federal judges in the 9th circuit the President has the authority to act in the interest of national security.

As the study points out President's as far back as Carter have used the authority to impose tariffs and quotas to protect national security. Of course since it is President Trump taking the action the possibility of the US military having to depend on China for steel and aluminum is ignored in favor of hyperbole about Trump acting as a dictator.
Only 2% of US steel and aluminum used comes from China.

All of the steel and aluminum used for US defense department contracts, with only rare exceptions, comes from US production. The use of American materials on defense contracts is imposed by law and it takes a formal request for waiver to use materials not produced in the US.

I worked on numerous defense contracts for the US government and the requirement to use US produced materials was inherent to all of them. We don't have any problem in providing the steel and aluminum we require for national defense and imported steel and aluminum isn't used for national security related production purposes.

The 9th Circuit Court ruled that Trump's executive order cited national security but the DOJ was unable to produce any evidence that national security was involved. The DOJ and White House have never produced any evidence that "national origin" represents a creditable threat to the United States and the Department of Homeland Security states that national origin is not a threat to the security of the United States.

To claim a national security threat exists there actually has to be evidence that the threat exists. We have enough domestic production of steel and aluminum to meet our national security interests and national origin does not create a national security threat related to immigration.

So Trump's wrong twice because the evidence simply doesn't support the claims that our national security is at risk.
__________________
"I always had a rule, if a restaurant is dirty on the outside, it's dirty on the inside." Donald Trump

"I always had a rule, if the White House is dirty on the inside, it's dirty on the outside." ShivaTD

Based upon the corruption, brutality, inhumanity, immorality, dishonesty, and incompetence of the Trump administration the White House is the dirtiest house in America and there's no known cleanser that with remove the stains of the Trump Administration.
Reply With Quote
  #23 (permalink)  
Old 03-18-2018, 09:49 AM
ShivaTD's Avatar
Progressive Libertarian
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Immigrant to Arizona
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,221
Thanks: 1,439
Thanked 2,203 Times in 1,744 Posts
Default Re: Trump says U.S. to impose hefty tariffs on steel, aluminum imports

Quote:
Originally Posted by AZRWinger View Post
Overheated rhetoric and harping about the Constitution blindly are a poor substitute for actual consideration of the issue.

From the time of President Washington dispatching Federal troops to put down What's rebellion to Jefferson sending the Marines to deal with the Barbary pirates ending the US paying tribute to them, the President is given wide latitude for acting on behalf of national security. Yet somehow the Republic survives.

There is no question the production of steel and aluminum is necessary for national security. It follows the President's Constitutional authority allows them to levy tariffs to protect these domestic industries. Trump hating Senator Flake tried unsuccessfully to get Congress to block the tariffs. Like it or not the tariffs are Constitutional.

Obama's declaration of executive amnesty for so-called Dreamers is without national security consideration. An applicable parallel would be Obama's military intervention in Libya. The President was within his authority to commit the military. But, Obama openly defied the war powers act by continuing the deployment beyond 30 days.
No one has a real problem with presidential action related to national security but there must be evidence that national security is at risk. It can't just be a president claiming a national security risk but instead the risk must actually exist.

Trump claimed national security was at risk based upon national origin of some people that wanted to immigrate to the United States. His executive order was challenged in numerous courts and the DOJ produced no evidence of a national security threat. The Department of Homeland Security stated that national origin was not grounds for establishing a threat. Mike Pence, as governor, even lost a federal lawsuit where he claimed a threat related to Syrian refugees but wasn't able to produce any evidence of that threat.

The US produces far more steel and aluminum that it requires for national defense because all defense contracts require the use of US produced steel and aluminum already. There's no shortage so there isn't a national security threat.

President Obama did not provide amnesty under DACA. It was deferred prosecution and a condition for qualifying for DACA was that the person couldn't represent a threat to the American people or a national security threat. All applicants were subjected to a background check to ensure that they weren't a threat and their status was reviewed every two years.
__________________
"I always had a rule, if a restaurant is dirty on the outside, it's dirty on the inside." Donald Trump

"I always had a rule, if the White House is dirty on the inside, it's dirty on the outside." ShivaTD

Based upon the corruption, brutality, inhumanity, immorality, dishonesty, and incompetence of the Trump administration the White House is the dirtiest house in America and there's no known cleanser that with remove the stains of the Trump Administration.
Reply With Quote
  #24 (permalink)  
Old 03-18-2018, 12:07 PM
Conservative Sage
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
Posts: 15,856
Thanks: 8,760
Thanked 9,448 Times in 5,780 Posts
Send a message via ICQ to AZRWinger
Default Re: Trump says U.S. to impose hefty tariffs on steel, aluminum imports

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShivaTD View Post
No one has a real problem with presidential action related to national security but there must be evidence that national security is at risk. It can't just be a president claiming a national security risk but instead the risk must actually exist.

Trump claimed national security was at risk based upon national origin of some people that wanted to immigrate to the United States. His executive order was challenged in numerous courts and the DOJ produced no evidence of a national security threat. The Department of Homeland Security stated that national origin was not grounds for establishing a threat. Mike Pence, as governor, even lost a federal lawsuit where he claimed a threat related to Syrian refugees but wasn't able to produce any evidence of that threat.

The US produces far more steel and aluminum that it requires for national defense because all defense contracts require the use of US produced steel and aluminum already. There's no shortage so there isn't a national security threat.

President Obama did not provide amnesty under DACA. It was deferred prosecution and a condition for qualifying for DACA was that the person couldn't represent a threat to the American people or a national security threat. All applicants were subjected to a background check to ensure that they weren't a threat and their status was reviewed every two years.
Trump's action was based on conclusions reached by a Department of Commerce study. Denying the evidence Trump used to justify the tariffs betrays a partisan bias if not a detachment from reality.

In the full tilt craziness of the Resistance the Federal judiciary, especially the 9th circuit, is empowered to second guess the POTUS on national security matters. Why bother with elections when the black robed judiciary will just issue so-called judicial reviews to please Resistance zealots.
__________________
The Democrat's strategy for the Trump Presidency is the same one used by Stalin's secret police chief "show me the man and I will show you the crime."
Reply With Quote
  #25 (permalink)  
Old 03-19-2018, 01:51 AM
mr wonder's Avatar
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Virginia
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,360
Thanks: 9,398
Thanked 5,657 Times in 3,810 Posts
Default Re: Trump says U.S. to impose hefty tariffs on steel, aluminum imports

Quote:
Originally Posted by AZRWinger View Post
Trump's action was based on conclusions reached by a Department of Commerce study. Denying the evidence Trump used to justify the tariffs betrays a partisan bias if not a detachment from reality.

In the full tilt craziness of the Resistance the Federal judiciary, especially the 9th circuit, is empowered to second guess the POTUS on national security matters. Why bother with elections when the black robed judiciary will just issue so-called judicial reviews to please Resistance zealots.
Why bother with the constitution if the President can override it, and the congress and the courts based on reports about so-called "national security" from people within his own executive branch?

Do you see the problem here AZ?
Even if you truly believe Trump is doing the right thing "in this case".
Do you see the problem with the process?
__________________
Hope is the dream of the waking man.
Aristotle

For there is hope of a tree, if it be cut down, that it will sprout again, and that the tender branch thereof will not cease.
Job 14:6-8
Reply With Quote
  #26 (permalink)  
Old 03-19-2018, 02:20 AM
mr wonder's Avatar
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Virginia
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,360
Thanks: 9,398
Thanked 5,657 Times in 3,810 Posts
Default Re: Trump says U.S. to impose hefty tariffs on steel, aluminum imports

Quote:
Originally Posted by AZRWinger View Post
Trump's action was based on conclusions reached by a Department of Commerce study. Denying the evidence Trump used to justify the tariffs betrays a partisan bias if not a detachment from reality.

In the full tilt craziness of the Resistance the Federal judiciary, especially the 9th circuit, is empowered to second guess the POTUS on national security matters. Why bother with elections when the black robed judiciary will just issue so-called judicial reviews to please Resistance zealots.
"National Security" has always been a vague term and if Presidents are NOW somehow granted Legislative powers AND also can simply ignore the Courts based on it then there's nothing much left for the congress to do AZ.

The president in his 2017 "National Security Strategy" outlined a load of issues he felt important among the items in his list are..
-Defend Against Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD)
-Combat Biothreats and Pandemics
-Strengthen Border Control and Immigration Policy
-Defeat Jihadist Terrorists
-Dismantle Transnational Criminal Organizations
-Keep America Safe in the Cyber Era
Does that mean he can MAKE up laws and ignore the courts in all the above areas to fix the holes in "national security"?

Nearly every other Executive dept writes up National security reports
the Dept of Ag issues national security reports and outlines threats to the food supply and farming and imports.
Does that mean that Trump can make up laws for all that too?
the CDC (Center for Disease Control) writes up National security assessments on various threats to health in the U.S. and world wide. Does that mean that Trump can make up laws on what everyone in the U.S must do with their health?
Can you imagine what reports about National Security might look like from the EPA under a democrat? Could climate change policy be considered a "national security" issue in anyone's mind?

The real question becomes what's NOT a national security threat, since by your reckoning the Constitution does not come into play until there are no threats.

BTW the Supreme court has ruled and commented on the concept that the constitution doesn't come into play if there's some SO CALLED or even real threat.
Emergency does not increase granted power or remove or diminish the restrictions imposed upon power granted or reserved. The Constitution was adopted in a period of grave emergency. Its grants of power to the federal government and its limitations of the power of the States were determined in the light of emergency, and they are not altered by emergency. –
Charles Evans Hughes
(1862-1948), Chief Justice, U.S. Supreme Court, Home Building & Loan Assn v. Blairsdell, 1934
__________________
Hope is the dream of the waking man.
Aristotle

For there is hope of a tree, if it be cut down, that it will sprout again, and that the tender branch thereof will not cease.
Job 14:6-8

Last edited by mr wonder; 03-19-2018 at 02:34 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #27 (permalink)  
Old 03-19-2018, 08:58 AM
Conservative Sage
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
Posts: 15,856
Thanks: 8,760
Thanked 9,448 Times in 5,780 Posts
Send a message via ICQ to AZRWinger
Default Re: Trump says U.S. to impose hefty tariffs on steel, aluminum imports

Quote:
Originally Posted by mr wonder View Post
"National Security" has always been a vague term and if Presidents are NOW somehow granted Legislative powers AND also can simply ignore the Courts based on it then there's nothing much left for the congress to do AZ.

The president in his 2017 "National Security Strategy" outlined a load of issues he felt important among the items in his list are..
-Defend Against Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD)
-Combat Biothreats and Pandemics
-Strengthen Border Control and Immigration Policy
-Defeat Jihadist Terrorists
-Dismantle Transnational Criminal Organizations
-Keep America Safe in the Cyber Era
Does that mean he can MAKE up laws and ignore the courts in all the above areas to fix the holes in "national security"?

Nearly every other Executive dept writes up National security reports
the Dept of Ag issues national security reports and outlines threats to the food supply and farming and imports.
Does that mean that Trump can make up laws for all that too?
the CDC (Center for Disease Control) writes up National security assessments on various threats to health in the U.S. and world wide. Does that mean that Trump can make up laws on what everyone in the U.S must do with their health?
Can you imagine what reports about National Security might look like from the EPA under a democrat? Could climate change policy be considered a "national security" issue in anyone's mind?

The real question becomes what's NOT a national security threat, since by your reckoning the Constitution does not come into play until there are no threats.

BTW the Supreme court has ruled and commented on the concept that the constitution doesn't come into play if there's some SO CALLED or even real threat.
Emergency does not increase granted power or remove or diminish the restrictions imposed upon power granted or reserved. The Constitution was adopted in a period of grave emergency. Its grants of power to the federal government and its limitations of the power of the States were determined in the light of emergency, and they are not altered by emergency. –
Charles Evans Hughes
(1862-1948), Chief Justice, U.S. Supreme Court, Home Building & Loan Assn v. Blairsdell, 1934
The President did not make up new laws by imposing tariffs neither did he act under a novel theory of executive power. From the article cited earlier the President has other statutory authority to impose tariffs besides the law he cited.

Quote:
Through the Trading With the Enemy Act of 1917, the president can impose a tariff during a time of war. But the country doesn’t need to be at war with a specific country — just generally somewhere where the tariffs would apply. (This is how Richard Nixon imposed a 10 percent tariff in 1971, citing the Korean War.)
The Trade Act of 1974 allows the president to implement a 15 percent tariff for 150 days if there is “an adverse impact on national security from imports.” After 150 days, the trade policy would need congressional approval.
There’s the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977, which would allow the president to implement tariffs during a national emergency.
The novel interpretation is on your part with the claim that the tariffs are new law and give the President authority to destroy the Republic. Congress can reign in the President if sufficient political will can be mustered or there is always the option of activists appealing to a hand picked Federal judge puffed up to believe the law is subject to their whim.

Each case of the President's exercise of authority must be evaluated on its own merit not condemned based on hysteria.
__________________
The Democrat's strategy for the Trump Presidency is the same one used by Stalin's secret police chief "show me the man and I will show you the crime."
Reply With Quote
  #28 (permalink)  
Old 03-19-2018, 09:30 AM
mr wonder's Avatar
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Virginia
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,360
Thanks: 9,398
Thanked 5,657 Times in 3,810 Posts
Default Re: Trump says U.S. to impose hefty tariffs on steel, aluminum imports

Quote:
Originally Posted by AZRWinger View Post
The President did not make up new laws by imposing tariffs neither did he act under a novel theory of executive power. From the article cited earlier the President has other statutory authority to impose tariffs besides the law he cited.

The novel interpretation is on your part with the claim that the tariffs are new law and give the President authority to destroy the Republic. Congress can reign in the President if sufficient political will can be mustered or there is always the option of activists appealing to a hand picked Federal judge puffed up to believe the law is subject to their whim.

Each case of the President's exercise of authority must be evaluated on its own merit not condemned based on hysteria.
Was the chief justice of the SOCTUS quote hysteria?
No, It's simply and clearly based on the constitution.
I think the only reason it may seem "NOVEL" to you is becasue you, the MSM, and congress are so used to the constitution being ignored that folks actually expecting the gov't to follow the constitution seems weird and outlandish.

But please stop trying to make my view here seem like one of pure emotion and not THE LAW.
i could put more emphasis on the the idea that that your In love with Trump and therefore youre desperate to find any justification for anything he does like a wife whose been beaten by her husband but doesn't want her husband to go to jail.
but that wouldn't be cool.
I'm just trying to point out the law. the highest law of the land.
just has you've done when talking about the 2nd amendment.

Seems to me you'd want to stand by the rest of the constitution with the same conviction. rather than calling others hysterical for wanting it to be the legal standard... for everyONE even Trump.

Quote:
Through the Trading With the Enemy Act of 1917, the president can impose a tariff during a time of war.
This law itself unconstitutionally cedes Congressional authority. they should make an amendment. However the law is limited.
but please note the supreme court quote i cited earlier.

Quote:
But the country doesn’t need to be at war with a specific country —
that's not even what that law says.
so 1st they break the constitution, then bend/break the law that breaks the constitution.

Quote:
just generally somewhere where the tariffs would apply. (This is how Richard Nixon imposed a 10 percent tariff in 1971, citing the Korean War.)
Nixon was wrong, just becasue presidents DO IT, doesn't mean it's constitutional.
Obama made changes to Immigration policy, and attacked Libya, spied on all American citizens, Killed American citizens overseas, etc etc.
Citing what presidents DID ... got away with... doesn't make it constitutional.

Quote:
The Trade Act of 1974 allows the president to implement a 15 percent tariff for 150 days if there is “an adverse impact on national security from imports.”
Again... This law itself unconstitutionally cedes Congressional authority. they should make an amendment if they wanted this. However the law is limited.
but please note the supreme court quote i cited earlier.

Quote:
After 150 days, the trade policy would need congressional approval.
Again... This law itself unconstitutionally cedes Congressional authority. they should make an amendment if the wanted this. However the law is limited.
but please note the supreme court quote i cited earlier.

Quote:
There’s the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977, which would allow the president to implement tariffs during a national emergency.
But there IS NO national emergency today.
Again... This law itself again cedes Congressional authority. However it is limited.
but please note the supreme court quote i cited earlier.

None of above so called exceptions even apply to the tariffs Trump wants to put in play.
Trump and his supporters are telling us that things are GREAT economically. And we're not at war.
Unless you and others want to pretend that we're really in a "war on terror", a war on drugs" a "war on Heart disease" a "war on poverty" or war on some other abstract concept that will be NEVER ENDING. Therefore giving any president the power to do what ever he wants ... becasue war and you've added "national security"
__________________
Hope is the dream of the waking man.
Aristotle

For there is hope of a tree, if it be cut down, that it will sprout again, and that the tender branch thereof will not cease.
Job 14:6-8

Last edited by mr wonder; 03-19-2018 at 09:38 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #29 (permalink)  
Old 03-19-2018, 12:10 PM
mr wonder's Avatar
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Virginia
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,360
Thanks: 9,398
Thanked 5,657 Times in 3,810 Posts
Default Re: Trump says U.S. to impose hefty tariffs on steel, aluminum imports

the Pentagon issued a report
23 July 2015
NATIONAL SECURITY IMPLICATIONS OF CLIMATE-RELATED RISKS AND A CHANGING CLIMATE
http://archive.defense.gov/pubs/1507...ce=govdelivery

lets plug this fact into your reason a president can change laws.
The Department of Commerce Pentagon study, link to download in the article, concluded that foreign dumping steel and aluminum in the US market Climate Change posed a threat to US national security. Contrary to the belief of Federal judges in the 9th circuit the President has the authority to act in the interest of national security.

There is no question the production of steel and aluminum Climate is necessary for national security. It follows the President's Constitutional authority allows them to levy tariffs, ban green house gases, fine and limit coal, oil and other industries to protect these domestic industries, the homeland and mother earth!!!!

Even a bunch of congress folks and Vox say that climate change is a national security risk
link
And this paper link talks about how while the president is not really prominent as the lead or having a say in the execution of the "National Environmental Policy Act" of 1969 or "Clean Air Act", "Clean Water Act", or the "Solid Waste Disposal Act" or other pollution laws and amendments of 1955, 1963, 1965, 1967, and 1970.
However he has more of a role under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980 primarily designed to removed old waste.

However OF COURSE they note very clearly that in CASES OF NATIONAL SECURITY the president can override all these legal statutes... as long as he makes a report to congress.

I ask you again AZ, do you see the problem here?
__________________
Hope is the dream of the waking man.
Aristotle

For there is hope of a tree, if it be cut down, that it will sprout again, and that the tender branch thereof will not cease.
Job 14:6-8

Last edited by mr wonder; 03-19-2018 at 12:18 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #30 (permalink)  
Old 03-21-2018, 08:01 AM
Conservative Sage
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
Posts: 15,856
Thanks: 8,760
Thanked 9,448 Times in 5,780 Posts
Send a message via ICQ to AZRWinger
Default Re: Trump says U.S. to impose hefty tariffs on steel, aluminum imports

Quote:
Originally Posted by mr wonder View Post
Was the chief justice of the SOCTUS quote hysteria?
No, It's simply and clearly based on the constitution.
I think the only reason it may seem "NOVEL" to you is becasue you, the MSM, and congress are so used to the constitution being ignored that folks actually expecting the gov't to follow the constitution seems weird and outlandish.

But please stop trying to make my view here seem like one of pure emotion and not THE LAW.
i could put more emphasis on the the idea that that your In love with Trump and therefore youre desperate to find any justification for anything he does like a wife whose been beaten by her husband but doesn't want her husband to go to jail.
but that wouldn't be cool.
I'm just trying to point out the law. the highest law of the land.
just has you've done when talking about the 2nd amendment.

Seems to me you'd want to stand by the rest of the constitution with the same conviction. rather than calling others hysterical for wanting it to be the legal standard... for everyONE even Trump.


This law itself unconstitutionally cedes Congressional authority. they should make an amendment. However the law is limited.
but please note the supreme court quote i cited earlier.

that's not even what that law says.
so 1st they break the constitution, then bend/break the law that breaks the constitution.

Nixon was wrong, just becasue presidents DO IT, doesn't mean it's constitutional.
Obama made changes to Immigration policy, and attacked Libya, spied on all American citizens, Killed American citizens overseas, etc etc.
Citing what presidents DID ... got away with... doesn't make it constitutional.


Again... This law itself unconstitutionally cedes Congressional authority. they should make an amendment if they wanted this. However the law is limited.
but please note the supreme court quote i cited earlier.

Again... This law itself unconstitutionally cedes Congressional authority. they should make an amendment if the wanted this. However the law is limited.
but please note the supreme court quote i cited earlier.

But there IS NO national emergency today.
Again... This law itself again cedes Congressional authority. However it is limited.
but please note the supreme court quote i cited earlier.

None of above so called exceptions even apply to the tariffs Trump wants to put in play.
Trump and his supporters are telling us that things are GREAT economically. And we're not at war.
Unless you and others want to pretend that we're really in a "war on terror", a war on drugs" a "war on Heart disease" a "war on poverty" or war on some other abstract concept that will be NEVER ENDING. Therefore giving any president the power to do what ever he wants ... becasue war and you've added "national security"
The SCOTUS quote you claim justifies your position is plucked from a 1934 ruling where the Court overturned a Wisconsin law preventing foreclosures for 2 years. The crisis was the Great Depression. The ruling pertained to contractual rights.

https://www.casebriefs.com/blog/law/...n-v-blaisdell/

I could emphasize the rabid determination to attack Trump leading to plucking misleading excerpts from irrelevant SCOTUS opinions then trying to pass them off as supporting the attack but that would be engaging in the same hysteria.
__________________
The Democrat's strategy for the Trump Presidency is the same one used by Stalin's secret police chief "show me the man and I will show you the crime."
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
aluminum, hefty, imports, impose, says, steel, tariffs, trump

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:05 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0