SCOTUS Catch-all | SCOTUS overturns IEEPA Trump tariffs

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 908
  • Views: 38K
  • Politics 
Calheel said:
Article I?

Or is that two words?
Click to expand...
The phrase, was "regulate commerce". Ultimately, it was SCOTUS interpretation of "regulate" that got him.

Interestingly, the emergency powers that Biden tried to use to forgive a trillion in student loans said "statutory or regulatory provision". Sounds very similar to "regulate commerce" but the liberal justices had a much different opinion about the use of emergency powers when it was a Dem President.....
 
ZenMode said:
The phrase, was "regulate commerce". Ultimately, it was SCOTUS interpretation of "regulate" that got him.
Click to expand...
This is incorrect. It is not close to being correct. Regulate was interpreted as it was because of the surrounding context.

Courts do not interpret the same language in different statutes the same way, just because they are the same word.

Why don't you just suck it up and go to law school, man? You will have plenty of time there for your humiliation fetish.
 
superrific said:
This is incorrect. It is not close to being correct. Regulate was interpreted as it was because of the surrounding context.
Click to expand...
Right.... context is part of interpretation, so what I said is, in fact, correct... and close to correct.
superrific said:
Courts do not interpret the same language in different statutes the same way, just because they are the same word.
Click to expand...
Agree. They, at least the liberal justices, appear interpret similar things differently depending on who's in the White House.
 
Last edited:
ZenMode said:
Right.... context is part of interpretation, so what is said is, in fact, correct... and close to correct.
Click to expand...
Whatever this is supposed to mean. You're doing your little routine again, I see. "It was one word" -> 'no, it was a lot of words" -> "so I was right because contexts are words."

Not engaging any more on this. It's boring. It's like the Lakers taking on a high school JV team. It quickly loses everyone's interest.
 
ZenMode said:
What it's supposed to mean is what I said was correct and not incorrect.


The wording or specific word isn't relevant. What's relevant is the double standard by liberal justiced.
Click to expand...
I haven’t been following this whole debate. But are you saying the liberals have a double standard because they were ok with the executive using emergency powers to defer student loan payments but not tariffs?

Is that your argument?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top