Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

US Trade Court finds Trump tariffs illegal

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 568 posts

Re: US Trade Court finds Trump tariffs illegal

#171

Post by Aurornis »

rayiner wrote: post #151
wlesieutre wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He would have to convince the courts that I don't like having a trade deficit with anyone somehow means our trading partners are "placing a burden or disadvantage upon the commerce of the United States by any of the unequal impositions or discriminations aforesaid"

He doesn’t have to convince the courts of that. The President makes foreign policy, not the courts. As long as the President is plausibly exercising a foreign policy power Congress gave him, the courts don’t get to reweigh the evidence and decide for themselves whether the trade deficits result from other countries placing trade barriers or something else.

> The President makes foreign policy, not the courts

The courts aren’t making foreign policy. That’s a strawman argument.

The President also doesn’t have unlimited powers. It’s President, not King or Dictator.

The President must act within the powers granted by law. The court has determined this act was outside of the law.

Re: US Trade Court finds Trump tariffs illegal

#172

Post by fakedang »

rayiner wrote: post #151
wlesieutre wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He would have to convince the courts that I don't like having a trade deficit with anyone somehow means our trading partners are "placing a burden or disadvantage upon the commerce of the United States by any of the unequal impositions or discriminations aforesaid"

He doesn’t have to convince the courts of that. The President makes foreign policy, not the courts. As long as the President is plausibly exercising a foreign policy power Congress gave him, the courts don’t get to reweigh the evidence and decide for themselves whether the trade deficits result from other countries placing trade barriers or something else.

Used to be a time when Congress made foreign policy. Oh, how fast they grow up... (sheds tear)

Re: US Trade Court finds Trump tariffs illegal

#173

Post by [deleted] »

mangoman wrote: post #121

I'm not a lawyer or even close to it, but why wouldn't the trump admin use the tariff act of 1930? quote: "Whenever the President shall find as a fact that any foreign country places any burden or disadvantage upon the commerce of the United States by any of the unequal impositions or discriminations aforesaid, he shall, when he finds that the public interest will be served thereby, by proclamation specify and declar…

[deleted]

Re: US Trade Court finds Trump tariffs illegal

#174

Post by duxup »

crummy wrote: post #145
megaman821 wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Usually I think saying both-sides is pretty lazy, but has any Congress in the last few decades done anything but delegate more of their authority to someone else? One party always complains about Executive Orders and interference when the other party is President, but then never curtails the power when they get a chance.

I remember Obama struggling pretty hard to get Obamacare through congress (and it ended up fairly watered down).

Obamacare still has stood the test of time. Even in the face of the first Trump administration and both houses of congress being run by the GOP.

Despite promises to "repeal Obamacare" they never did repeal it... or even change it much at all. It was just too popular / the consequences too much to consider.

The joke at the time being that the Republicans would repeal Obamacare and replace it with the Affordable Care Act ;)

Re: US Trade Court finds Trump tariffs illegal

#175

Post by Aurornis »

BobbyTables2 wrote: post #89

So when do prices go back down?

Any inventory imported under the tariffs still needs to be sold through. There’s also a threat that this administration will ignore the ruling or pull other tricks to suddenly impose tariffs through some other avenue.

As long as tariff threats are being thrown around and this administration continues to act unpredictably, we are far from out of the woods.

Re: US Trade Court finds Trump tariffs illegal

#176

Post by acdha »

xigency wrote: post #92
0xy wrote: post #50

[flagged]

I agree. As someone with libertarian ideals I dislike both of these parties (almost) equally.

As a former libertarian I have a hard time squaring that philosophically with not saving most of your dislike for the people attacking habeus corpus, the rule of law, ignoring judicial rulings, etc. There is plenty to dislike about the Democrats but this is a completely new level of assault on core libertarian principles.

Re: US Trade Court finds Trump tariffs illegal

#177

Post by hoseyor »

mangoman wrote: post #121

I'm not a lawyer or even close to it, but why wouldn't the trump admin use the tariff act of 1930? quote: "Whenever the President shall find as a fact that any foreign country places any burden or disadvantage upon the commerce of the United States by any of the unequal impositions or discriminations aforesaid, he shall, when he finds that the public interest will be served thereby, by proclamation specify and declar…

You sure have a lot of confidence in the people in power today to think that they could produce something better than was produced 100 years ago when there was still actual debate and bills were read. These people today just pass bills based on it having a catchy sounding title.

Re: US Trade Court finds Trump tariffs illegal

#178

Post by lovich »

curt15 wrote: post #131
mangoman wrote: post #121

I'm not a lawyer or even close to it, but why wouldn't the trump admin use the tariff act of 1930? quote: "Whenever the President shall find as a fact that any foreign country places any burden or disadvantage upon the commerce of the United States by any of the unequal impositions or discriminations aforesaid, he shall, when he finds that the public interest will be served thereby, by proclamation specify and declar…

> (other than being almost 100 years old) Age alone shouldn't disqualify a law. The law above all other laws, aka the Constitution, is more than 200 years old.

The Constitution as it stood 200 years ago is not the Constitution as it stands today.

Comparing an unmodified law based on age is not the same as comparing a mutable documents original age

Re: US Trade Court finds Trump tariffs illegal

#179

Post by tomschlick »

growlNark wrote: post #163

[flagged]

Then change it through amendments.

However you likely wont be able to because not enough people agree with you to do so. Our constitution was made to be specifically hard to change unless a vast majority agreed. That's a feature, not a bug. If a change can't be agreed upon at the national level it should stay at the state / local level.

> It should, however, cause people who voted for this (hypothetically dead or disabled or otherwise incapacitated) politician to see themselves as the piles of shit they are.

Case in point, it protects us from reactionary changes based on vitriol like this instead of substance.

Post reply on HN