- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Things Aren't Looking Great For Trump In Supreme Court Tariff Arguments
Posted on 11/5/25 at 1:58 pm to udtiger
Posted on 11/5/25 at 1:58 pm to udtiger
quote:
The greater authority includes the lesser. Basic legal maxim.
That argument would eliminate the Major Questions Doctrine.
The HEROES Act permitted the Sec of Education "waive or modify" provisions for student loans. That's a greater authority than cancelling portions of those loans. How was the Biden admin thwarted in its attempts to cancel $10k of those loans?
It failed for the same reason these tariffs are likely to fail.
1
Posted on 11/5/25 at 2:00 pm to ChatGPT of LA
quote:
Meh, if they can't be imposed, how do they exist?
If they can't be imposed, these tariffs won't exist.
quote:
How did they begin if no one can impose?
Are you talking about tariffs, generally? Per specific statutes via Congress.
Posted on 11/5/25 at 2:00 pm to Major Dutch Schaefer
One of the oldest democrat tricks in the books is just to keep repackaging the same thing using a different flimsy law because if enough time passes you've accomplished your goal
Trump learned form them
Its my theory that it was always the plan...
They knew what they were doing was flimsy at best constitutionally. But what they can do is put them in place, it will take awhile for them to wind through the court system, and then if slapped down...
Simply cite another congressional act. Repeat. Time passes
Trump learned form them
Its my theory that it was always the plan...
They knew what they were doing was flimsy at best constitutionally. But what they can do is put them in place, it will take awhile for them to wind through the court system, and then if slapped down...
Simply cite another congressional act. Repeat. Time passes
Posted on 11/5/25 at 2:01 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
He framed the tariffs as an exercise of the power to regulate foreign commerce.
That still requires specific Congressional authorization via statute.
quote:\
He contended any revenue raised by the tariffs is "incidental" to their primary purpose of changing consumer behavior
Yes, I already joked that we have an "Obamacare isn't a tax" situation brewing (although this one isn't likely to survive so that joke's punchline is likely DOA)
Posted on 11/5/25 at 2:01 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:Roger you are so full of excrement.
MAGA is more victim ridden than female progressives.
Posted on 11/5/25 at 2:02 pm to RollTide4547
quote:
Roger you are so full of excrement.
And you have paper thin feelings.
quote:
The 1999 Seattle WTO protests, sometimes referred to as the Battle of Seattle,[1] were a series of anti-globalization protests surrounding the WTO Ministerial Conference of 1999, where members of the World Trade Organization (WTO) convened at the Washington State Convention and Trade Center in Seattle, Washington on November 30, 1999. The Conference was to be the launch of a new millennial round of trade negotiations.
The negotiations were quickly overshadowed by massive street protests outside the hotels and the Washington State Convention and Trade Center. The protests were nicknamed "N30", akin to J18 and similar mobilizations. The large scale of the demonstrations, estimated at no fewer than 40,000 protesters, dwarfed any previous demonstration in the United States against a world meeting of any of the organizations generally associated with economic globalization, such as the WTO, the International Monetary Fund, and the World Bank.[2]
LINK
MAGA and Antifa...sitting in a tree..
This post was edited on 11/5/25 at 2:04 pm
Posted on 11/5/25 at 2:03 pm to Fun Bunch
quote:
They knew what they were doing was flimsy at best constitutionally. But what they can do is put them in place, it will take awhile for them to wind through the court system, and then if slapped down...
Simply cite another congressional act. Repeat. Time passes
I have to wonder how this will affect future injunction power from lower courts, though. If the admin keeps "breaking the law" trying to find that perfect statute, I can imagine their efforts are permitted to be enjoined, at some point, to avoid exactly what you described (and the impact on the larger system that would cause).
Having these tariffs ruled invalid is going to create INSANE transaction costs and likely severe short-term economic pain.
Posted on 11/5/25 at 2:04 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Who cares if it breaks the law and violates the Constitution, am I right?
It doesn't, you moronic bleeding vagina.
Posted on 11/5/25 at 2:04 pm to RohanGonzales
quote:
quote:
Pure MAGA victimology.
Pure kneejerk TDS horse shite
Yup. As always.
Posted on 11/5/25 at 2:05 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:My feeling have nothing to do with you being more full of dung than a constipated blue whale.
And you have paper thin feelings.
Posted on 11/5/25 at 2:05 pm to BTROleMisser
quote:
It doesn't, you moronic bleeding vagina.
Are you a constitutional attorney?
Posted on 11/5/25 at 2:06 pm to RollTide4547
quote:
My feeling have nothing to do with you being more full of dung than a constipated blue whale.
Spot on the MAGA brand.
5th grade booger flicking.
Posted on 11/5/25 at 2:08 pm to RogerTheShrubber
Dude get some help for that TDS.
Posted on 11/5/25 at 2:09 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
That would fall squarely on Trump's admin for fricking it up so badly and being so aggressive when they didn't have the authority to do so.
He' and his team are the only ones busting his arse to save America.
No one else comes close.
The situation is desperate and calls for desperate measures.
Posted on 11/5/25 at 2:09 pm to Major Dutch Schaefer
Tariffs are likely illegal but that isn’t my concern. The major concern is Congress is useless and likely receives kickbacks from poor trade agreements so there is no incentive to renegotiate and there is no mechanism for playing tough with other nations if tariffs aren’t an option. That’s what the “free traders” never seem to grasp. Why would China renegotiate a one sided trade deal without the threat of tariffs? They wouldn’t and neither would other nations so we are just supposed to accept unfair trade deals in the name of “free trade”
Posted on 11/5/25 at 2:10 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:Are you?
Are you a constitutional attorney?
Posted on 11/5/25 at 2:11 pm to RollTide4547
quote:
Are you a constitutional attorney?
Are you?
Youre the one here pretending to understand the constitution, not me, Gomer.
The only reason you think Trumps tariffs are constitutional are because youre in a cult.
Posted on 11/5/25 at 2:12 pm to TrueTiger
quote:
The situation is desperate
It's not
quote:
and calls for desperate measures.
Your prior argument is showing the costs of acting emotionally in this manner. When your emotions are wrong, the costs are high.
Next time I hope they use logic instead
Posted on 11/5/25 at 2:12 pm to TrueTiger
quote:
The situation is desperate and calls for desperate measures.
According to whom?
Posted on 11/5/25 at 2:12 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:Weren't those tariffs supposed to collapse our economy by now? How's that working out? Dows up 30% since April
The only reason you think Trumps tariffs are constitutional are because youre in a cult.
Page 2 of 10
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News