• sidelove@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    143
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    Super fun, watching our president reject every possible off-ramp with hostility only to later freak out and panic when there are no more off-ramps left. Fucking moron

  • credo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    21 hours ago

    Here is something I’ve been curious about. Congress has undisputed constitutional control of tariffs. A previous Congress enacted a law to delegate some of that authority to the President.

    So now… how can the President (or anyone) just say, “fuck you, you can’t have your constitutional power back?” Why can’t Congress just fall back to their constitutional authority and render their predecessors’ delegation invalid?

    • homura1650@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 hours ago

      Congress does not have the constitutional authority to declare a prior Congresses laws invalid. For a bunch of internal stuff like the fillubuster rules, or remote voting, the current Congress can do whatever it wants without presidential review. However once a law is passed through the constitutional process, the constitution does not have a separate process for repealing it. This means that Congress would need to go through the same constitutional process to repeal it, which includes the possibility of a presidential veto.

      Having said that, the Supreme Court does have the constitutional authority to declare a law invalid[0], and the President has no veto authority over that. Further, the current Supreme Court has invented out of nothingness two bedrock pillars of constitutional analysis:

      1. The Major Questions Doctrine, which states that questions of major political or economic significance may not be delegated by Congress to the executive branch.

      2. The Non-Delegation Doctrine, which states that Congress may not delegate it’s lawmaking authority to other entities.

      Since the Supreme Court is an unbiased arbiter of the law, I’m confident that they will apply these principles consistently and determine that Congress’s initial delegation if tarrif authority was unconditional. /s

      [0] This is not actually explicit in the Constitution. But has been how it is interpreted since Marbury v Madison in 1803.

    • Poach@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      19 hours ago

      President can veto any bill. It will go back to Congress and needs (I think) 2/3 to override the veto

  • ceenote@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    61
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    If he had 3 brain cells to rub together, he’d take this offramp and say “The tariffs were beautiful, and working perfectly, but the China-loving RINOs and Democrats killed them before we brought manufacturing back to our shores and eliminated income taxes.”

  • santa@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    46
    ·
    1 day ago

    Well, technically he can. Then Congress can just override it with two-thirds majority. Grow those spines — you got this.

    • CuddlyCassowary@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      So, if this is initially approved with a 2/3 majority can he still veto it and then they have to vote again? Or is there such a thing as a “veto-proof” initial passing?

      • CaptDust@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        32
        ·
        1 day ago

        They always need to vote again, sometimes a president veto will cause a bill to lose support and reps have an opportunity to change their vote.

        Sometimes though presidents won’t veto if it passes initially at that threshold, depending how embedded they are in their perspective.

        • CuddlyCassowary@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          1 day ago

          Thank you for explaining. I feel like I’m becoming an armchair constitutional process hobbyist this year (against my natural inclinations). I appreciate you, and all the knowledgeable people who take the time to help educate.

  • 1995ToyotaCorolla@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    1 day ago

    If trump vetos (which we all know he would) can’t the senate overturn his veto? Though I think a vote to overturn would require 2/3 majority