Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump · ¶423

Rather, in the foreign affairs context, this Court has interpreted statutes as written, with respect for the primacy of Congress's and the President's roles in foreign affairs and without using the major questions doctrine as a thumb on the scale against the President. See, e. g., Department of Navy v. Egan, 484 U. S. 518, 529–530 (1988). That deeply rooted textualist approach to interpreting foreign affairs statutes is nothing new. What is new and rather extraordinary is the approach embodied in The Chief Justice's opinion for three Justices, which would extend the major questions doctrine into the foreign affairs realm for the first time.

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