Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump · ¶472

It is also useful to underscore the extraordinary nature of the plaintiffs' nondelegation argument here. The plaintiffs' submission would mean that these tariffs would be unlawful even if IEEPA explicitly authorized tariffs. Unlike their statutory and major questions doctrine arguments, their nondelegation argument is not based on a lack of an explicit reference to “tariffs” or “duties” or the like. Their nondelegation argument instead goes much further and would require very specific congressional directions to the President on when and under what circumstances he could impose tariffs and how high those tariffs could be. The plaintiffs' theory would have dramatic consequences and likely wipe out many of the existing tariff statutes that have long been upheld by this Court, as well as TWEA. And if the tariff authority here is unlawful, so too are most if not all IEEPA authorities such…

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