Supreme Court prepares to weigh tariffs fight in test of Trump's power

Contributing sentiments towards policy:

51% : "The justices are going to have to confront this really extraordinary breadth of the government's argument."The plaintiffs also argued that trade deficits hardly constitute an "unusual and extraordinary threat," as imbalances have lasted for five decades, and Mr. Trump himself has described them as "persistent."Additionally, the power to levy taxes and duties rests squarely with Congress, and any delegations of that power have been "explicit and strictly limited," they said.
50% : Neal Katyal, who will argue on behalf of the small businesses before the Supreme Court, warned in filings that the Trump administration's interpretation of IEEPA is a "breathtaking assertion" of power that requires explicit authorization from Congress.If the Supreme Court agrees with Mr. Trump that the power to tax is found in IEEPA through the phrase "regulate … importation," then "the president, empowered by a supercharged U.S. Code, could tax everything from autos to zoos," Katyal wrote in a filing."The government's theory is really that the president has the ability to impose sales taxes, property taxes, use taxes, essentially a wealth tax under IEEPA," Timothy Meyer, an expert in international law at Duke Law, told CBS News.
50% : "If you create a system in which you get deference if you can characterize something as a foreign affairs issue, but there's no deference if it's done by an administrative agency pursuing some sort of statutory delegation, then the administration will just do as much as it can through emergency and international affairs powers."The Supreme Court has been skeptical of broad assertions of executive authority on issues of major political and economic significance when Congress has not spoken clearly, invoking what's called the major questions doctrine to invalidate former President Joe Biden's plan to wipe away more than $400 billion in student loan debt and block an eviction moratorium during the COVID-19 pandemic.
50% : Cephalofair Games, a California-based company that designs and publishes board games, has paid more than $144,000 in new tariffs over the past few months, according to its chief operating officer, Price Johnson.In July, Cephalofair informed its customers it would be adding "tariff surcharges" as a result of the import taxes and has increased the prices of its products.
47% : Since Mr. Trump announced the tariffs in February and April — on what he called "Liberation Day" — the administration has reached trade deals with 10 countries and the European Union, and said it is "actively negotiating" with more foreign nations.
46% : But lawyers for the small businesses counter that tariffs are a tax on the American people, and the Constitution has vested the taxing power in Congress."Taxing American citizens is not national security or foreign policy, and the tariffs are paid by Emily Ley and other ordinary Americans," said Mark Chenoweth, president and chief legal officer at the New Civil Liberties Alliance.
45% : An analysis from the Tax Foundation found the duties will impose $1.7 trillion in new taxes on Americans by 2035, reduce GDP growth by 0.7% per year, and reduce income by 1.1% in 2026.
38% : That case is not before the Supreme Court."To argue that unilateral taxation of American citizens is national security or foreign policy is incorrect," Chenoweth said.
30% : "We fought a Revolutionary War over the idea of taxation without representation, and that's what this would be if the president can unilaterally raise taxes on American citizens."A "mass extinction" of small businessesWhile lower courts have agreed that Mr. Trump's global and trafficking tariffs are illegal, the government has continued to collect the duties as the Supreme Court weighs the cases.For Julie Robbins, CEO of EarthQuaker Devices, that has meant paying nearly $40,000 in levies through the end of October.The family-owned company makes guitar pedals and manufactures its products in Akron, Ohio.

*Our bias meter rating uses data science including sentiment analysis, machine learning and our proprietary algorithm for determining biases in news articles. Bias scores are on a scale of -100% to 100% with higher negative scores being more liberal and higher positive scores being more conservative, and 0% being neutral. The rating is an independent analysis and is not affiliated nor sponsored by the news source or any other organization.