Claims extracted
17
sentences that state something as happening or true
Uncertain
6%
1 of 17 hedged
("reportedly", "may", "according to")
Leaning
Leans strongly left
of the writing, not the subject · beta estimate
Publisher signals
67/100
Reason's corrections and
hedging, across everything collected from it. Not a measure of accuracy.
Outlets on this story
1
Politics
Same framing elsewhere
1
articles that frame the event the way this one does
Yesterday, the Cato Institute and I filed an amicus brief before the US Court of International Trade, in Gellert Global Corp. v. Trump, the first case challenging Donald Trump's massive 50% Section 338 tariffs against Canadian imports.
asserted
Institute → file → imports
The plaintiff is represented by the Liberty Justice Center, the public interest law firm I worked with on the case challenging the massive tariffs Trump imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA).
asserted
Trump → represent → Act
That case resulted in the tariffs' invalidation by the Supreme Court earlier this year.
asserted
case → result → Court
I previously wrote about the Section 338 tariffs and why they are harmful and illegal in an article in The Dispatch, and a paper for the Montreal Economic Institute.
asserted
they → write → Institute
We are grateful to Daniel Cannistra and others at Crowell & Moring for their invaluable pro bono assistance in helping draft and submit the brief on very short notice.
asserted
We → draft → notice
Here is a summary of our key arguments, which should soon be posted at the Cato website:
asserted
which → post → website
This brief explains why Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930 cannot be used to impose the tariffs enacted by Defendants, and why doing so violates the major questions and nondelegation doctrines.
asserted
doing → explain → questions
The Court should strike down the Section 338 duties for three reasons.
asserted
Court → strike → reasons
First, Section 338 requires that any tariffs imposed be in response to discriminatory trade restrictions enacted by foreign trading partners, and that those tariffs "offset" the barriers imposed by those countries.
asserted
tariffs → require → countries
The Section 338 tariffs imposed by the Trump administration violate both of these requirements.
asserted
tariffs → impose → requirements
In addition, Section 338 has been superseded by later statutes and is no longer operative.
asserted
Section → supersede → statutes
Second, the major questions doctrine forecloses interpreting Section 338 to permit the President to impose extraordinary import taxes whenever another country imposes any trade restrictions or declines to purchase American goods.
asserted
country → foreclose → goods
to "speak clearly" when it assigns to the executive "decisions of vast 'economic and political significance.'"
asserted
it → speak → significance
The sweeping power claimed by the administration in this case undeniably raises a major question, and it is at the very least unclear that Section 338 actually grants such vast authority.
uncertain
Section → claim → authority
Third, stripping the statute's qualitative conditions of operative force violates the nondelegation doctrine, which constrains delegation of legislative power to the executive.
asserted
which → strip → executive
An extremely high rate ceiling of 50 percent cannot substitute for clear legislative limiting how and when tariffs can be imposed.
asserted
tariffs → substitute → limiting
Cato and I (together with Prof. Michael McConnell) also recently submitted an amicus brief in litigation challenging Trump's massive Section 301 tariffs.
asserted
Cato → submit → tariffs
The Aporia
