Skip to main content

Have we had a tariff decision yet?






 As the new year rolled in, many scholars and observers of the Supreme Court expected a quick opinion on the Trump tariff case. The courts below have held that the president does NOT have the authority he is claiming here. The oral arguments did not seem to advance the administration's cause. 

So: if there is to be a decision striking down the tariffs, AND that decision would have complicated consequences in terms of working out the rebates, THEN it stands to reason SCOTUS will want to get the deed done quickly, lessening the complication.  The constant payment of these tariffs constitutes a tick-tick-tick that a court contemplating such a decision may want to shorten. 

Yet as of this writing -- no tariff decision.  January's opinion days have come and gone, with no opinion on this subject. 

Some are whispering that perhaps the outcome is not so clear-cut -- perhaps a court so much molded by President Trump will find a way to accommodate him. 

I disagree. To the extent at least that "way to accommodate" is taken to mean anything other than "find a way not to order rebates." If the court is working on doing THAT, and limiting itself to a clear declaration of the invalidity of the tariffs from this day forward, then the urgency of a quick decision fades. 

The dog isn't barking in the night because the dog has no good reason to do so. 

Comments

  1. The Court won’t order rebates because of the rule that Trump shall never face consequences for any violation of law or the Constitution that he commits, and his victims shall never be compensated.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Searle: The Chinese Room

John Searle has become the object of accusations of improper conduct. These accusations even have some people in the world of academic philosophy saying that instructors in that world should try to avoid teaching Searle's views. That is an odd contention, and has given rise to heated exchanges in certain corners of the blogosphere.  At Leiter Reports, I encountered a comment from someone describing himself as "grad student drop out." GSDO said: " This is a side question (and not at all an attempt to answer the question BL posed): How important is John Searle's work? Are people still working on speech act theory or is that just another dead end in the history of 20th century philosophy? My impression is that his reputation is somewhat inflated from all of his speaking engagements and NYRoB reviews. The Chinese room argument is a classic, but is there much more to his work than that?" I took it upon myself to answer that on LR. But here I'll tak...

A Story About Coleridge

This is a quote from a memoir by Dorothy Wordsworth, reflecting on a trip she took with two famous poets, her brother, William Wordsworth, and their similarly gifted companion, Samuel Taylor Coleridge.   We sat upon a bench, placed for the sake of one of these views, whence we looked down upon the waterfall, and over the open country ... A lady and gentleman, more expeditious tourists than ourselves, came to the spot; they left us at the seat, and we found them again at another station above the Falls. Coleridge, who is always good-natured enough to enter into conversation with anybody whom he meets in his way, began to talk with the gentleman, who observed that it was a majestic waterfall. Coleridge was delighted with the accuracy of the epithet, particularly as he had been settling in his own mind the precise meaning of the words grand, majestic, sublime, etc., and had discussed the subject with William at some length the day before. “Yes, sir,” says Coleridge, “it is a maj...

Five Lessons from the Allegory of the Cave

  Please correct me if there are others. But it seems to be there are five lessons the reader is meant to draw from the story about the cave.   First, Plato  is working to devalue what we would call empiricism. He is saying that keeping track of the shadows on the cave wall, trying to make sense of what you see there, will NOT get you to wisdom. Second, Plato is contending that reality comes in levels. The shadows on the wall are illusions. The solid objects being passed around behind my back are more real than their shadows are. BUT … the world outside the the cave is more real than that — and the sun by which that world is illuminated is the top of the hierarchy. So there isn’t a binary choice of real/unreal. There are levels. Third, he equates realness with knowability.  I  only have opinions about the shadows. Could I turn around, I could have at least the glimmerings of knowledge. Could I get outside the cave, I would really Know. Fourth, the parable a...