7 Comments
User's avatar
Torrance Stephens's avatar

Never thought of that. Great read

Ann P's avatar

If I’m not mistaken, the 150 days runs out in July, not June. In the meantime, the administration is going to be filing the paperwork to get the other tariffs that are available under the Trade Act of 1974 that require more actual procedures to be enacted. They have said that they’re already working on that paperwork, expecting to have one or more of those alternatives you mentioned in place by the time the 150 days runs out.

Joe Bishop-Henchman's avatar

Thank you for this catch! We have updated the piece.

Thomas L. Hutcheson's avatar

But the 122 tariffs are a huge substantive improvement over IEEPA lower on average and more uniform and since the harm from a tariff is proportional to the square of its rate, it is totally unable to inflict the harm that was being done with IEEPA. And the amount of paperwork required for TA74 to inflict similar harm would be enormous. [ https://thomaslhutcheson.substack.com/p/overturning-liberation-day-tariffs

]

DC Shepard's avatar

I’m glad my optimistic take prevailed in the end (https://historyflightsproductions.substack.com/p/historyflights-6-americas-blue-powerwashing) but I only had a basic understanding of these alternative statutes before your excellent article, even while recording my next video essay called America’s Dangerous President Worship. I’ll be sure to cite you in the script right on my Substack!

Joshua Katz's avatar

Joe, why would there be judicial estoppel if the government lost?

Joe Bishop-Henchman's avatar

Depending on the decision or the area, sometimes it's required that you previously won with the argument, sometimes not.