Last year, Trump announced a 25 percent import tax on steel and 10 percent tariff on aluminum imports. Recently, though, he reached deals to lift the tax duties for Canada and Mexico.
On Monday, The Supreme Court shut down a request to hear an appeal of a court order upholding Mr. Trump’s authority to impose steel tariffs under the scope of national security.
According to CNBC:
‘The case was brought by a group of companies in the steel industry who say they are harmed by the 25% tariffs on steel imports that Trump ordered early last year. Those tariffs have collected approximately $4.5 billion so far, the group wrote in a brief with the top court, a figure that “significantly understates the irreparable and ongoing harm” to their businesses.’
A March decision from the U.S. Court of International Trade which allowed for Trump’s tariffs stands in light of the court’s decision not to hear the case.
The plaintiffs for the case including the American Institute for International Steel have argued that the law Trump used to impose the tariffs allowed him too much leeway to circumvent Congress. They argued that it is a violation of the Constitution’s separation of powers.
‘The case was brought to the Supreme Court in an unusual process that sought to expedite its review. The plaintiffs, urging the justices to hear the case quickly, noted that Trump is considering tariffs on car and auto part imports in the coming months, also under Section 232. The justices may agree to take the case at a later date, after it faces further review in the lower courts.’
They also argued that section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 imposes no meaningful limits on the president’s authority
According to Customs and Border Protection, the tariffs apply to all countries except for Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Mexico and South Korea.
According to CNBC:
‘Congress has rebuked the president over his use of tariffs, but has so far not taken meaningful legislative action to limit his authority.
‘The Trump administration urged the top court not to take the case and argued that the president has wide-ranging authority over foreign affairs and national security matters.’
That has been the question. How much authority does the president truly have over foreign affairs and national security matters or any other matters? How much should he have? Just how skewed has the U.S. government system become?
One 2017 article in The Washington Post pointed how how “Trump exemplifies abuse of power.” Since that 2017 article, our country has been in an even larger downward spiral due to the president’s abuses of power – Children are being detained at the border under horrible conditions in facilities that constitute concentration camps.
In relation to Trump’s imposition of tariffs, The Post reported on Friday:
‘The move is a political and economic gamble for Trump and the GOP. If it backfires, Americans could face higher prices on everything from cars to microwaves, and the U.S. economy could sputter, hurting Republicans’ chances in the midterms and Trump’s in 2020. But if he manages to bring back a lot of steel jobs, he could be an even bigger hero to some blue-collar workers.’
Featured image is a screenshot via Twitter