Yesterday, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments and wrestled with the question of President Trump’s constitutional ability to impose sweeping tariffs. The outcome of the case will have vast economic and constitutional implications. The president himself described it as “one of the most important in the history of the country.” Legal scholars say it will be a close call. On the eve of oral arguments, the legal writer Linda Greenhouse anticipated “watching the conservative justices struggle to reconcile their deference to the president” with the “method they embrace in other contexts for interpreting statutes.” In the arguments, as the legal scholar Jack Goldsmith noted in a Q&A Times Opinion published yesterday, the justices did focus on methods like the major questions doctrine and suggested that “a majority of the court will in the end be very worried” about Trump’s tariffs “giving a president basically unconstrained tariff authority to raise revenue that Congress as a practical matter cannot reverse..” Still, Goldsmith says, the outcome is hard to predict. Read more: Here’s what we’re focusing on today:
We hope you’ve enjoyed this newsletter, which is made possible through subscriber support. Subscribe to The New York Times. Games Here are today’s Mini Crossword, Wordle and Spelling Bee. If you’re in the mood to play more, find all our games here. Forward this newsletter to friends to share ideas and perspectives that will help inform their lives. They can sign up here. Do you have feedback? Email us at opiniontoday@nytimes.com. If you have questions about your Times account, delivery problems or other issues, visit our Help Page or contact The Times.
|
