Podcasting since 2006. Providing historical context to today's politics. Knows a little about a lot.
SUBSCRIBE APPLE - https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/my-history-can-beat-up-your-politics/id169078375
(myhistorycanbeatupyourpolitics.wordpress.com)
My History Can Beat Up Your Politics
Loading...
I have such a way with words sometimes.
www.kentstateuniversitypress.com/2020/podcast...
www.patreon.com/posts/votes-...
Votes During Wartime: 1942 Midterms www.patreon.com/posts/votes-...
Question I posed earlier to Jerry (@presidencies.bsky.social) that I’d like to pass along to Alycia (@civicspod.bsky.social), Bruce (@myhist.bsky.social), and Kenny (@kennyryanaustin.bsky.social). Were Eisenhower and Ford the last upstanding Republican presidents?
3 votes dissent is important b/c it could presage denial of future review. So if new tariffs pushed. Fed. Judge knocks down, try to go to SCOTUS and only 3 votes to hear. Not enough. However this is not iron-clad, a 4th judge who voted affirmative on this opinion could do a friendly "I'll hear it"
With a little slap to Kavanaugh:" See supra, at 8–9; post, at 62–63. We do not speculate on hypothetical cases not before us. "
Kavanaugh argues, and so are a lot of supporters today that POTUS can use other statutes - Opinion answers: The cited statutes contain various combinations of procedural prerequisites, required agency determinations, and limits on the duration, amount, and scope of the tariffs they authorize.
and yet 3 is a plurality b/c no other reasoning has more votes.
Crazy decision but nonetheless a blow to Trump and his ill-considered notion that he can set tariffs target/duration/% by whim from the Oval. An opinion w/ 6 justices supporting decision [statue does not authorize Trump's tariffs], but only 3 supporting the reason why.
