The Justice Chronicles, Volume 45: Limits On The Power To Impose Tarriffs

I periodically read through Supreme Court decisions if the subject interests me and on February 20, 2026 they decided the case of Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump. I read this so you don’t have to.

President Trump has always believed incorrectly that a trade deficit is bad and it means other nations are taking advantage of us; he has used tariffs (taxes on imported goods) as way to limit imports. But because imposing tariffs has the same effect as collecting taxes it’s often been left to Congress.

There have always been exceptions and Trump held that in 1977 Congress gave him broad authority to impose tariffs in case of emergencies. He further held that trade deficits and imported drugs have created just that emergency.

In a 6-3 decision the Court found that President Trump exceeded his authority and struck down his tariffs. The majority consisted of Chief Justice John Roberts along with Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, Neil Gorsuch, Amy Coney Barrett and Ketanji Brown Jackson. Justices Clarence Thomas, Brett Kavanaugh and Samuel Alito dissented.

The 1977 law, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, gives the President broad authority to act when necessary. But the majority held that it was never intended to include tariffs and that if Congress intended to include tariffs it would have said so.

The dissenting opinion held that in times of emergency (that the President has the power to declare) require extraordinary measures and curtailing them would harm the country.

I agree with the majority. While I agree that the President should be given broad authority in many areas, these tariffs are outside of the law. The trade deficit does not harm our country and imposing tariffs will do nothing to impede the importation of illegal drugs. Bravo, Supreme Court.

The Trump Chronicles, Volume 176: Indicting Comey Again?

President Trump famously does not like former FBI Director James Comey. Last September the Department of Justice indicted Mr. Comey, charging him with lying to Congress. During his testimony in 2020 Mr. Comey denied directing leaks on the FBI’s investigation of Russian interference. Since there’s no proof (or even indication) that he lied the indictment was laughable and the court dismissed the indictment in November.

Hard to imagine but the latest indictment is even more laughable. Last month he was indicted again for an Instagram post from May of 2025. He was walking on a beach and saw that someone had arranged sea shells to read “86 47;” he thought it was funny and posted it. He later removed it. We all know the term “86” as a slang term to discard or reject. Decades ago when I worked in a restaurant we would “86” a menu choice if we ran out of it.

Not to miss an opportunity the Justice department has once again indicted him. It is (and should be) a crime to threaten the President. The indictment claims that Mr. Comey was directing violence against the President and “86” meant to cause him harm.

This is just silly and hopefully this indictment will be denied soon. Mr. Trump, you need to 86 this vendetta.