Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump · ¶147

Because of this problem, the dissent must argue for a much broader “foreign affairs” qualification to the major questions doctrine. Rather than ask whether an independent, constitutionally vested presidential power is implicated, the dissent would have us ask instead whether the President seeks to use the statute in question for a foreign affairs purpose— for example, as a “too[l]” to “incentivize a change in behavior by allies . . . or enemies.” Post, at 377. When he does, the dissent submits, the major questions doctrine should not apply. And that's true, the dissent continues, even if the power the President asserts has “significant domestic ramifcations.” Post, at 379.

preliminary print (page proof)
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.