Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump · ¶271

Second, in any event, the Court has never before applied the major questions doctrine in the foreign affairs context, including foreign trade. Rather, as Justice Robert Jackson summarized and remains true, this Court has always recognized the “ `unwisdom of requiring Congress in this field of governmental power to lay down narrowly defnite standards by which the President is to be governed.' ” Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 U. S. 579, 636, n. 2 (1952) (concurring opinion) (quoting United States v. Curtiss- Wright Export Corp., 299 U. S. 304, 321–322 (1936)). In foreign affairs cases, courts read the statute as written and do not employ the major questions doctrine as a thumb on the scale against the President.

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