🔥The 9th Round of Easy Loan, Earn $40 Reward is in progress❗️ ⏰ Promotion Period: January 15th - Feburary 15th, 2025 👉 Register now and check more details at gate.io/campaigns/358

Many people seem to think SCOTUS will defer to Trump on tariffs because they involve “foreign affairs.” Truman claimed foreign-affairs power to seize steel mills during the Korean War & the ruling blocking that seizure is one of the court’s most famous. washingtonpost.com/opinions/2025/…

More: Republicans might want to be careful about carving out a zone of excessive deference to presidents who claim “foreign affairs” power to compel behavior by people and entities in the United States. Could a Democratic president impose Green New Deal policies and cite

On Trump’s trade policy, the minor detail of whether any of this is legal shouldn’t fade into the background. washingtonpost.com/opinions/2025/…

Question is whether the moment of “institutional neutrality” we’re in now will become the new norm or is an exception of convenience.

"On Thursday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit heard arguments on Trump’s tariffs. The icy reception the administration received ought to have highlighted the policy’s constitutional vulnerability. But that defect still isn’t getting enough attention."

There’s a widespread expectation on the left and right that as a matter of political reality, the Supreme Court will just let Trump’s IEEPA tariffs stand. I just don’t see how they can & continue taking their major questions doctrine seriously.

If the president can spontaneously dictate border tax levels and the courts go along, we really are in some sort of post-constitutional age. wapo.st/45gFIJ8

So, three conservative justices are already on record applying the MQD in the context of immigration (that is, policy toward people crossing the border). I don't see why trade (policy toward goods crossing the border) is conceptually different.

Reveling in French, U.K. and Canadian plans to recognize a state of Palestine, Hamas has hardened its position and rejected new cease-fire talks. wsj.com/opinion/palest…

Need the Echelon Insights poll testing how Sydney Sweeney does in the 2028 Republican primary.

Yes, but if it's a "unitary executive" (which seems to be where we're headed) the distinction collapses