Can the Supreme Court Stop the Monster They Unleashed?

A Saturday Prompt

In front of the Supreme Court yesterday. (Photo by Aaron Schwartz via Getty Images)

In his discussion of the Supreme Court’s 6-3 ruling yesterday to strike down Donald Trump’s tariffs based on the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act, Justice Neil Gorsuch described the currently quaint notion of separation of powers found in the Constitution. His simply-stated words supporting the majority opinion read like he’s primarily talking to one man—a man who has proven he could not care less about the power of any government branch save the executive:

[M]ost major decisions affecting the rights and responsibilities of the American people (including the duty to pay taxes and tariffs) are funneled through the legislative process for a reason. Yes, legislating can be hard and take time. And, yes, it can be tempting to bypass Congress when some pressing problem arises. But the deliberative nature of the legislative process was the whole point of its design. Through that process, the Nation can tap the combined wisdom of the people’s elected representatives, not just that of one faction or man. There, deliberation tempers impulse, and compromise hammers disagreements into workable solutions.

Now we may question “the combined wisdom” of our lawmakers these days, but it was bracing to read this Trump-appointed justice remembering that it’s good when “deliberation tempers impulse.” We’ll see before long whether that sane thinking succeeds in denying Trump’s efforts to end birthright citizenship when the court rules on that issue.

But, on cue, the madness of King Donald was on full display after the Supreme Court said no to him. He called Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett (who voted with the majority) “a disgrace to the nation” and “an embarrassment to their families” and “very unpatriotic.” He childishly insisted they were “barely” invited to the State of the Union on Tuesday and said, “They’re just being fools and lapdogs for the RINOs [Republicans in name only] and the radical-left Democrats,” adding that “the court has been swayed by foreign interests and a political movement that is far smaller than people would ever think.” Of course, no evidence was provided for these ludicrous claims of “foreign interests.”

Trump was also quick to announce he was signing an order increasing tariffs on all countries by 10 percent under section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, insisting he could skip the approval of Congress by employing existing statutes. That 1974 law only permits import duties for a maximum of 150 days, ensuring that these actions set to take effect on Tuesday will continue to cause economic uncertainty in the U.S. and globally at least through July.

It was such uncertainty that Gorsuch—one of the six justices who voted in 2024 to grant Trump near-total immunity if he were re-elected—now warns against as he seems to have rediscovered his respect for Congress. “And because laws must earn such broad support to survive the legislative process, they tend to endure, allowing ordinary people to plan their lives in ways they cannot when the rules shift from day to day,” he wrote, adding a note about the value of democratic self-governance itself: “In all, the legislative process helps ensure each of us has a stake in the laws that govern us and in the Nation’s future.”

If only these thoughts guided Gorsuch in 2024 when he sided with the court’s extremist supermajority.

So what do you think? Can the Supreme Court stop the monster they unleashed? Are a majority of justices now grasping the danger they have caused from a man who thinks the law does not apply to him and who seeks total power? Or do you think this tariff ruling was not a change of heart, but a one-off response to Trump’s deployment of the emergency powers act? And does Trump’s unhinged response cause you fear or encourage you that his lashing out is a show of weakness?

As always, I look forward to reading your observations and the opportunity for the America, America community to learn from each other. Please do be respectful in your remarks. Trolling will not be tolerated.

Please consider becoming a paid subscriber for $50 a year or just $5 a month, if you’re not already. This helps sustain and expand the work of America, America, keep nearly all the content free for everyone and give you full access to the comments sections.