Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump · ¶156

If its effort to secure a broad foreign affairs exception to the major questions doctrine won't work, the dissent hints at a more limited one specific to tariffs. Such an exception makes sense, the dissent says, because “Presidents have long been granted substantial discretion over tariffs.” Post, at 379 (internal quotation marks omitted). Indeed, the dissent contends, this tradition traces “back to near the Founding.” Post, at 386–387. If the dissent were right about that, one might hesitate before accepting the President's concession that this case does not implicate any inherent Article II authority. But, at least as I read it, history offers the dissent little to work with.

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