Quite Possibly the Most Absurd SCOTUS Case of My Lifetime

Wednesday, November 05, 2025

The Supreme Court is about to hear oral arguments in a case that sounds like a fight over toy imports but is really about the future of presidential power.

Posted by jpw at 09:33 PM | 18 COMMENTS | permalink | Comment on This Entry |

Alternate links: Google News | Twitter

The U.S. Supreme Court must overturn the Trump Administration's illegal tariffs.

[image or embed]
-- Governor Gavin Newsom (@governor.ca.gov) Nov 5, 2025 at 1:57 PM

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

That that is even a question is ridiculous.

SCOTUS will, once and for all, either show their deference to the Constitution or will show their a&^.

Yet another marker of how ridiculous this entire situation is is that I can't say with any confidence that they won't show their a&^.

#1 | Posted by jpw at 2025-11-05 10:24 AM | Reply

Sauer seems to be grasping.
Barrett seems highly skeptical of Sauer's arguments.
Kagan's ripping his argument apart on "verbs."
Brown's been surgical.
Sotomayor's raised some decent questions.

Right now Sauer's getting ripped apart, but doing all he can to stick to his argument.

#2 | Posted by YAV at 2025-11-05 10:29 AM | Reply

LMAO! Sauer just said there's no empirical data that indicates Americans pay tariffs!

#3 | Posted by YAV at 2025-11-05 10:34 AM | Reply

Katyal just reminded Alito of Alito's previous position... lol

#4 | Posted by YAV at 2025-11-05 11:40 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Here is the prediction....they will rule that Pedo47 has the power to do so and there ruling in this case has no precedent on any future president.

#5 | Posted by Nixon at 2025-11-05 02:08 PM | Reply

Katyal just reminded Alito of Alito's previous position... lol

Like that means anything to this corrupt court.

#6 | Posted by Nixon at 2025-11-05 02:09 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Supreme Court appears skeptical of Trump's tariffs argument
www.yahoo.com

... Supreme Court justices on Wednesday expressed some skepticism about President Donald Trump's authority to impose sweeping tariffs on imports under a law designed for use during a national emergency.

The Supreme Court has a 6-3 conservative majority that has regularly backed Trump on various contentious cases since he took office in January, but based on the almost three-hour oral argument, the tariffs dispute is a close call.

Both conservative and liberal justices asked tough questions of Trump's lawyer, Solicitor General D. John Sauer, though some of the conservatives seemed more sympathetic to his arguments. ...

#7 | Posted by LampLighter at 2025-11-05 02:37 PM | Reply

My guess is that they'll weasel out a ruling as ambiguous as possible with a wide-ranging definition of the word "emergency" left for Trump's cowardly Congress to decide on a case by case basis.

(I think we all know where that's going to end up.)

My feeling is this Roberts Court will protect themself with ambiguity before they protect the country from Trump.

#8 | Posted by Twinpac at 2025-11-06 03:53 AM | Reply

The best was getting Pedo47's legal team to admit on the record that American's are the ones who pay the tariffs.

Not that it matters because he will just lie and say China pays them five minutes later.

That is the beauty of being a compulsive liar with significant cognitive decline.

#9 | Posted by Nixon at 2025-11-06 08:36 AM | Reply

Here is the prediction....they will rule that Pedo47 has the power to do so and there ruling in this case has no precedent on any future president.

From my reading of the tea leaves, Roberts and Barrett will side with Kagan, Jackson and Sotomayor. Gorsuch may also be on board.

It will be interesting to see if they address the $2B that has been taken in.

#10 | Posted by FedUpWithPols at 2025-11-06 09:51 AM | Reply

From my reading of the tea leaves, Roberts and Barrett will side with Kagan, Jackson and Sotomayor. Gorsuch may also be on board.

Eh. They're just signaling that the going price went up.

#11 | Posted by jpw at 2025-11-06 09:59 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

FUNNY FLAG!

#12 | Posted by john47 at 2025-11-06 12:08 PM | Reply

This really shouldn't even be a question. The tariffs are illegal.

And it's well past time to strip the president of ANY power to declare an "emergency" if congress is able to meet. And by "able to meet" I mean if more than half of them aren't suddenly dead. There should be NO ability for the president to order a single shot be fired without a declaration of war from congress if congress is able to meet.

The office has too much power. It needs to be taken back.

#13 | Posted by DarkVader at 2025-11-06 12:21 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

The office has too much power. It needs to be taken back.

#13 | Posted by DarkVader

Ironically, that power has been largely accumulated under a court packed with supposed "originalists" who apparently think the Founding Fathers thought a powerful individual was the anecdote to a monarchy.

#14 | Posted by jpw at 2025-11-06 12:45 PM | Reply

"This really shouldn't even be a question. The tariffs are illegal."

Based on constitutional law the ruling of the court should be obvious.

The fact that we cannot tell what this court will do with this most recent absurd demands of the Dotard who would be King tells the whole story of where we are today.

#15 | Posted by donnerboy at 2025-11-06 01:10 PM | Reply

The office has too much power. It needs to be taken back.

#13 | Posted by DarkVader

The point of the War Powers Act was to give the Executive flexibility in a fast moving situation, allowing a response to aggression before Congress could get a vote together.
To say that it's been abused over the years would be a gross understatement. Especially by this turd burglar.

#16 | Posted by morris at 2025-11-06 02:53 PM | Reply

"The office has too much power. It needs to be taken back."

#13 | Posted by DarkVader

Trump casts an evil menacing shadow over the GOP which has them acting like frightened -------.

#17 | Posted by Twinpac at 2025-11-07 02:40 AM | Reply

" Sure, Congress could step in. The Constitution gives it the exclusive power to regulate commerce with foreign nations and to levy tariffs. But for decades, lawmakers have handed that power away, preferring the convenience of broad statutes that let presidents take the heat while they issue press releases"

This is the problem. It's a decades long problem.

#18 | Posted by BellRinger at 2025-11-07 12:43 PM | Reply