Constitution is clear when it comes to Trump's tariffs

Will the Supreme Court's conservatives follow the letter of the laws, or be a rubber stamp for Trump?

- ERWIN CHEMERINSKY CONTRIBUTING WRITER

ARE THE Supreme Court's conservative justices just a rubber stamp for President Trump, virtually always willing to approve his actions? Or will the justices follow consistent, albeit conservative, principles, even if it means ruling against the world's most powerful man? We will get a clear indication when the court convenes on Wednesday to decide two cases concerning the legality of the tariffs imposed by the president.

At this point, it's estimated that about $1 trillion in tariffs has already been collected. Trump has said that their invalidation "would be a total disaster for the country" and might "literally destroy the United States of America." In its brief to the Supreme Court, his administration noted that, to the president, "these cases present a stark choice: With tariffs, we are a rich nation; without tariffs, we are a poor nation.'Suddenly revoking the President's tariff authority under the [International Emergency Economic Powers Act],' he warns, 'would have catastrophic consequences for our national security, foreign policy, and economy."

But the issue before the courtargued in Learning Resources Inc. vs. Trump and in Trump vs. V.O.S. Selections is not whether the tariffs are desirable. Rather, the legal question is one of statutory interpretation: whether the IEEPA, a law adopted in 1977 under President Carter, authorizes Trump to impose tariffs via executive order.