What’s at play in high-stakes case that could finally curb Trump’s power: legal expert

This Wednesday, October 5, the U.S. Supreme Court is hearing oral arguments in Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump — a case involving President Donald Trump's ability to unilaterally impose steep tariffs via executive order based on the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977 (IEEPA). The High Court is also grappling with these issues in a companion case, Trump v. V.O.S. Selections.

MSNBC legal analyst Lisa Rubin, in an article published ahead of the oral arguments, examines the issues at play in the tariffs cases and emphasizes that the outcome will have major implications for both the presidency and Congress.

"IEEPA, enacted in 1977, gives the president the authority to respond to any 'unusual and extraordinary threat…. to the national security, foreign policy, or economy of the United States' if he declares a national emergency concerning that threat," Rubin explains. "And once he declares such an emergency, the president can investigate, regulate, or prohibit, among other things, any imports or exports. In defending Trump's tariffs before the Supreme Court, the Justice Department has pointed to several Trump executive orders declaring national emergencies."

Rubin continues, "One of those orders centered around goods trade deficits, which Trump has said hampered production of goods domestically and has compromised national security and military readiness. In declaring it a national emergency, Trump also ordered reciprocal tariffs: A ten percent universal tariff and additional, country-specific tariffs ranging from 11 to 50 percent."

At issue "before the Court," Rubin notes, "is whether the president has the power to 'regulate' tariffs.

"Opponents of Trump's tariff actions characterize them as a tax that only Congress can impose; the administration, on the other hand, insists that taxes are a form of regulation — and can rely on some founding-era writings, as well as an early Supreme Court opinion, to frame tariffs as regulation, not taxes or duties," the MSNBC legal expert notes. "But there's more: If the Court finds that the IEEPA does give Trump broad tariff authority, it will also need to determine whether the Act itself is unconstitutional in giving the president — rather than Congress — the power to wield it…. The stakes are high, not only for Trump's economic agenda, but also, for his vision of presidential power."

Rubin adds, "But don't expect to have any answers right away, as a decision could be weeks or evenmonths down the road."

Lisa Rubin's full article for MSNBC is available at this link.