Marketplace All-in-One Skepticism and a civics lesson from SCOTUS
Nov 6, 2025
Jess Braven, a Supreme Court correspondent for The Wall Street Journal, joins to dissect the latest court arguments surrounding presidential powers to impose tariffs without congressional consent. The justices express skepticism about the administration's broad claims of emergency authority, emphasizing that taxing powers lie with Congress. Braven also highlights Justice Gorsuch’s warning about the risks of shifting power to the executive branch. Additionally, listeners learn about the real-world impact of suspended SNAP benefits on a Central California food bank, revealing the struggles of individuals in need.
AI Snips
Chapters
Transcript
Episode notes
Court Skepticism Over Broad Emergency Trade Power
- Supreme Court justices reacted skeptically to using an old emergency powers law to let a president rewrite trade policy unilaterally.
- The court treated the case on its merits, signaling it won't automatically defer to the administration.
Tariffs Seen As Congressional Tax Power
- Justices emphasized that imposing tariffs equates to taxation, a core congressional power that raises revenue.
- The court accepted challengers' framing that tariffs differ from diplomatic measures and implicate Congress's taxing authority.
Administration Frames Tariffs As Foreign Policy
- The administration tried to frame tariffs as foreign-policy tools rather than revenue measures to gain deference.
- Justices questioned that position and noted taxes aimed at raising revenue are different from diplomatic actions.