Donald Trump’s Latest Threat Against Germany Is a Reminder That He Stretches the Law to Do Whatever the Heck He Wants

The Trump administration’s great insight about trade policy has been to realize that it can use a relatively obscure Cold War-era law—Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962—as an all-purpose permission slip to slap duties on foreign products. The statute empowers the president to raise tariffs in order to defend U.S. “national security” interests—a broadly defined concept that includes the “economic welfare of individual domestic industries” and the “weakening of our internal economy.” If the administration wants to take protectionist measures, in theory it just needs to have the Commerce Department produce a report first purporting to show that imports are undermining our ability to make stuff domestically. That’s all the legal cover Trump needs if he wants to rain down economic revenge on Angela Merkel for looking at him the wrong way.

And yet, Trump keeps giving the game away. After Trump said that he would impose tariffs on steel and aluminum under Section 232, the president announced on Twitter that he would only spare Canada and Mexico from them if they renegotiated NAFTA—thus making it clear that the levies were not about national security or protecting specific industries for the good of the nation at all, but rather gaining negotiating leverage. In the case of cars, the Commerce Department hasn’t even finished its report laying out a national security case yet, and Trump is already admitting that the tariffs are really about battering the EU into making trade concessions.

You’d think that this would all make room for a lawsuit to stop these tariffs, since the president has all but admitted that he’s only using national security as a thin pretense to do whatever the heck he wants. And yet, if its hearing on the administration’s Muslim travel ban are any indication, the Supreme Court appears to be very hesitant to second guess the White House’s official justifications for its actions based on the president’s actual statements. Trump doesn’t care what the law says. And sadly, it seems he doesn’t have to.

One more thing

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You May Also Like

Federal regulators fine Wells Fargo $1 billion for unfair lending practices

Two federal regulators on Friday announced [press release] a $1 billion settlement with Wells Fargo [official site] after finding [text, PDF] that the the bank violated the Consumer Financial Protection…
View Post

Dataism vs. Privacy-Facebook in the Spotlight

The Challenge of Policing Facebook Are our institutions up to the challenge of protecting users from information-age problems? This is the high-level question emerging from the Facebook-Cambridge Analytica debate. While…
View Post

Violent attacks against protesters in Nicaragua

Amnesty International (AI) [advocacy website] denounced [press release] the “systematic ‘shoot-to-kill’ policy of [Nicaragua’s] President Ortega’s government” in a press release on Wednesday. The statement follows an AI report [text,…
View Post

Former New York Senate majority leader found guilty of corruption in retrial

Former New York Senate Majority leader, Dean Skelos, and his son, Adam Skelos, were found guilty for the second time on charges of corruption. The pair were first arrested and…
View Post

Washington: The protesters declared American President treason

(Lawsiteblog)Washington: The protesters declared American President treason   The protest continues against US President Donald Trump. For three consecutive nights, those who demonstrated in front of the White House are…
View Post