Trump Gonna Trump
But he's still nowhere near as menacing as FDR's attacks on the judiciary. If he wants to make liberal heads explode, he'd give one of FDR's attacks verbatim, and see who notices.
I can feel President Trump’s pain. The U.S. Court of International Trade—yeah, I had never heard of it before this week either—is one of those “inferior courts” that Article III of the Constitution says Congress may establish. Such courts are usually for narrow and specific purposes, like hearing Social Security appeals, or contract disputes with the federal government (the Federal Court of Claims)—things that regular district courts don’t want to have clogging their dockets.
As I understand it, this court typically handles disputes about product classification for tariff schedules, because a different classification may have a lower tariff rate. For example, educational products have lower tariff rates, so it you can get your Teddy Ruxpin doll classified as an “educational product,” you get a lower tariff rate and a competitive advantage for Christmas sales.
So it is rather remarkable that this obscure and heretofore limited court would weigh in on a matter of international policy is quite striking. I’ll skip over a full analysis here, as we discuss this ruling at length in the next episode of the Three Whisky Happy Hour podcast, which will be up later today.
My bottom line: this ruling is so flimsy and defective that I think it might make it more likely Trump’s tariff power survives in regular federal court from other challenges that are more solidly founded.
In the meantime, here is Trump’s expression of frustration over the matter, and oh my!
My exit question is whether the left will now embrace the Federalist Society, now that Trump has turned on it. Stranger things have happened. In any case, I’m guessing the Federalist Society won’t be inviting President Trump to give the annual Barbara Olson lecture any time soon.
And Trump still doesn’t reach the FDR non-gold standard for attacks on the judiciary, but my Iceland itinerary continues momentarily, so this will have to wait for later.
I do not believe that federal courts constitute a branch "coequal" to Congress or to the President.
The Constitution spells it out: "The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish."
What Congress can establish, Congress can disestablish. That principle applies as much to this tariff "court" as it does to Judge Boasberg and the other District Court judges.
The principle applies as well to jurisdiction. Congress has the power to limit the jurisdiction of the federal courts.
What we are experiencing is a slow-motion coup under the generalship of Supreme Court Justices who seek to promote the power of their institution over the other two branches and over the country as a whole.
What is happening here is similar to what is happening in Israel, where judges have usurped power not properly belonging to them.
Fortunately, unlike Israel, we have a Constitution. Sooner or later, we may be forced to exercise the legitimate powers it grants to Congress and the President.
At some point The USSC is going to Have To Deal/Rule with these lower courts. Thinking (always a mistake :-)) that in making a National Ruling 2-3 have to get together to make a ruling/injunction.
Addendum: Just 1 Judge/Circuit should not have THAT much power. Q: Should 1 President have THAT much power also?