Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Great to have John Decker back with US twenty four
to seven News White House correspondent John good morning.
Speaker 2 (00:07):
Hey, good morning. Hope you're doing well today. Hope you
had a great weekend.
Speaker 1 (00:09):
Yes, and you and Big News broke on a couple
of fronts and Trump World. A couple of judges, one
of them basically stopping his deportation of Guatemala and children
back to their home country. The other one said, you
can't do these tariffs, mister president. That is huge if
(00:31):
it holds up.
Speaker 2 (00:31):
What's the latest, Well, that one is huge, and it's
not just one judge, it's an entire federal appellate court.
It was altogether eleven judges that heard these arguments. Seven
ruled against the administration, four ruled alongside the Trump administration.
This decision will likely now be decided by the US
(00:54):
Supreme Court. That's assuming that the Trump administration appeals that ruling,
and I think they will. But as things stand right now,
the terroriffts remain in place through October the fourteenth. That
will give time for the administration to put together their
appeal to the US Supreme Court.
Speaker 1 (01:12):
Yeah, and that's about the time they convene, right, So
is it the first one.
Speaker 2 (01:17):
Well, that's right. The Supreme Court convene for the fall
session the first Monday in October, so I have no
doubt this will be on their docket in the fall term.
Speaker 1 (01:27):
I understand that there were robust, robust dissent or maybe
more than one to the majority, and that I would
think will help the Trump people craft their arguments before
the Supreme Court. Let's suppose, though, that the Supreme Court
John upholds this ruling. What does this do to the
(01:49):
Trump's economic and foreign policy agenda?
Speaker 2 (01:52):
It really upends it. It up ends it. You know.
I don't think there's a day that goes by that
the President doesn't talk about the tens and hens of
billions of dollars coming into the US treasury because of
the President's tariffs policy. Imagine if all that goes away,
and also imagine if those importers that have been paying
those tariffs say, you know what, we want to refund
(02:14):
now for those illegal tariffs that were placed upon us
as the importer. So that could certainly impact the President's
economic agenda, his legislative agenda going forward.
Speaker 1 (02:27):
Talking with John Ducker twenty four to seven News White
House correspondent, the President implemented these tariffs under the International
Emergency Economic Powers Act. So what is this court saying
that he used that incorrectly.
Speaker 2 (02:45):
Well, what they're saying, first and foremost is that the
power to tariff is a power that's vested in Congress.
They say tariffs are essentially taxes. It's not the executive
branch that can impose tariffs or taxes. It's the legislative
branch that can do So. Now you mentioned the law
that the president and his administration are relying upon. It's
(03:08):
a nineteen seventy seven law. They're saying that there's nothing
contained in the law that even mentions the word tariffs.
So that's what the majority says. The centers claim in
their argument their dissenting opinion that this is within the
purview of the Office of the Presidency because of the
(03:29):
national security reasons cited by the administration for imposing these tariffs. Ultimately,
as you know, this will be decided by a super
conservative majority at the US Supreme Court.
Speaker 1 (03:42):
Yeah, and best, and the Treasury Secretary says, we better
be writing and we're looking at alternatives if this ruling
is upheiled. I wonder what those alternatives would be that's
because that's what we're talking.
Speaker 2 (03:55):
Yeah, I don't know. I don't know how you make
up for all of that tariff revenue. That's an awfully low,
large amount of money that we're talking about here.
Speaker 1 (04:02):
This was a huge deal. Say nothing of American credibility.
If this goes away, then our trading partners have no
idea what's next?
Speaker 2 (04:13):
Yes, well that's right now. What I think that the
back to me, if I was thinking about what comes next,
let's not forget the Republicans control Congress, they control the
White House, and there's nothing to stop this Republican late
Congress from imposing these tariffs and doing it legislatively. And
(04:34):
that would to me is the backups should be the
backup stance of the administration if the courts rule against them.
Speaker 1 (04:40):
Would that have to be both houses, in which case
it'll never happen.
Speaker 2 (04:45):
Oh yeah, it would have to be both the House
and the Senate, as well as obviously signed by the
Republican President Donald J. Trump. But look, they've already shown
that they can move legislation forward without any democratic support.
To me, the clock is ticking because the midterm elections.
We'll be talking about that this time next year, they're
(05:07):
right around the corner. So to me, if indeed they
lose at the Supreme Court, and I'm assuming that this
case does get appealed to the US Supreme Court, but
you have to plan for contingencies what happens if you
lose at the US Supreme Court, And the contingency to
me would be Congress Congress stepping in and passing these
tariffs and applying it to every one of America's stuating park.
Speaker 1 (05:28):
Do you know, John, could the Senate do that to
reconciliation census budget related.
Speaker 2 (05:34):
The absolutely so and so could the House? Yeah, simple majority.
So you know, there are some Republicans that feel that,
you know, caiff policies should not be used in the
manner that the President is using it. That being said,
the president, as you've seen it, the President can apply
a lot of pressure on those Republicans to get his way.
(05:54):
So you know, I would keep my eye on that
if indeed they lose in the courts on this particular issue.
Speaker 1 (06:00):
Indeed. Okay, John, Thanks good stuff.
Speaker 2 (06:02):
John,
Great to have John Decker back with US twenty four
to seven News White House correspondent John good morning.
Speaker 2 (00:07):
Hey, good morning. Hope you're doing well today. Hope you
had a great weekend.
Speaker 1 (00:09):
Yes, and you and Big News broke on a couple
of fronts and Trump World. A couple of judges, one
of them basically stopping his deportation of Guatemala and children
back to their home country. The other one said, you
can't do these tariffs, mister president. That is huge if
(00:31):
it holds up.
Speaker 2 (00:31):
What's the latest, Well, that one is huge, and it's
not just one judge, it's an entire federal appellate court.
It was altogether eleven judges that heard these arguments. Seven
ruled against the administration, four ruled alongside the Trump administration.
This decision will likely now be decided by the US
(00:54):
Supreme Court. That's assuming that the Trump administration appeals that ruling,
and I think they will. But as things stand right now,
the terroriffts remain in place through October the fourteenth. That
will give time for the administration to put together their
appeal to the US Supreme Court.
Speaker 1 (01:12):
Yeah, and that's about the time they convene, right, So
is it the first one.
Speaker 2 (01:17):
Well, that's right. The Supreme Court convene for the fall
session the first Monday in October, so I have no
doubt this will be on their docket in the fall term.
Speaker 1 (01:27):
I understand that there were robust, robust dissent or maybe
more than one to the majority, and that I would
think will help the Trump people craft their arguments before
the Supreme Court. Let's suppose, though, that the Supreme Court
John upholds this ruling. What does this do to the
(01:49):
Trump's economic and foreign policy agenda?
Speaker 2 (01:52):
It really upends it. It up ends it. You know.
I don't think there's a day that goes by that
the President doesn't talk about the tens and hens of
billions of dollars coming into the US treasury because of
the President's tariffs policy. Imagine if all that goes away,
and also imagine if those importers that have been paying
those tariffs say, you know what, we want to refund
(02:14):
now for those illegal tariffs that were placed upon us
as the importer. So that could certainly impact the President's
economic agenda, his legislative agenda going forward.
Speaker 1 (02:27):
Talking with John Ducker twenty four to seven News White
House correspondent, the President implemented these tariffs under the International
Emergency Economic Powers Act. So what is this court saying
that he used that incorrectly.
Speaker 2 (02:45):
Well, what they're saying, first and foremost is that the
power to tariff is a power that's vested in Congress.
They say tariffs are essentially taxes. It's not the executive
branch that can impose tariffs or taxes. It's the legislative
branch that can do So. Now you mentioned the law
that the president and his administration are relying upon. It's
(03:08):
a nineteen seventy seven law. They're saying that there's nothing
contained in the law that even mentions the word tariffs.
So that's what the majority says. The centers claim in
their argument their dissenting opinion that this is within the
purview of the Office of the Presidency because of the
(03:29):
national security reasons cited by the administration for imposing these tariffs. Ultimately,
as you know, this will be decided by a super
conservative majority at the US Supreme Court.
Speaker 1 (03:42):
Yeah, and best, and the Treasury Secretary says, we better
be writing and we're looking at alternatives if this ruling
is upheiled. I wonder what those alternatives would be that's
because that's what we're talking.
Speaker 2 (03:55):
Yeah, I don't know. I don't know how you make
up for all of that tariff revenue. That's an awfully low,
large amount of money that we're talking about here.
Speaker 1 (04:02):
This was a huge deal. Say nothing of American credibility.
If this goes away, then our trading partners have no
idea what's next?
Speaker 2 (04:13):
Yes, well that's right now. What I think that the
back to me, if I was thinking about what comes next,
let's not forget the Republicans control Congress, they control the
White House, and there's nothing to stop this Republican late
Congress from imposing these tariffs and doing it legislatively. And
(04:34):
that would to me is the backups should be the
backup stance of the administration if the courts rule against them.
Speaker 1 (04:40):
Would that have to be both houses, in which case
it'll never happen.
Speaker 2 (04:45):
Oh yeah, it would have to be both the House
and the Senate, as well as obviously signed by the
Republican President Donald J. Trump. But look, they've already shown
that they can move legislation forward without any democratic support.
To me, the clock is ticking because the midterm elections.
We'll be talking about that this time next year, they're
(05:07):
right around the corner. So to me, if indeed they
lose at the Supreme Court, and I'm assuming that this
case does get appealed to the US Supreme Court, but
you have to plan for contingencies what happens if you
lose at the US Supreme Court, And the contingency to
me would be Congress Congress stepping in and passing these
tariffs and applying it to every one of America's stuating park.
Speaker 1 (05:28):
Do you know, John, could the Senate do that to
reconciliation census budget related.
Speaker 2 (05:34):
The absolutely so and so could the House? Yeah, simple majority.
So you know, there are some Republicans that feel that,
you know, caiff policies should not be used in the
manner that the President is using it. That being said,
the president, as you've seen it, the President can apply
a lot of pressure on those Republicans to get his way.
(05:54):
So you know, I would keep my eye on that
if indeed they lose in the courts on this particular issue.
Speaker 1 (06:00):
Indeed. Okay, John, Thanks good stuff.
Speaker 2 (06:02):
John,
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
NFL Daily with Gregg Rosenthal
Gregg Rosenthal and a rotating crew of elite NFL Media co-hosts, including Patrick Claybon, Colleen Wolfe, Steve Wyche, Nick Shook and Jourdan Rodrigue of The Athletic get you caught up daily on all the NFL news and analysis you need to be smarter and funnier than your friends.