The Supreme Court appeared very hostile to President Donald Trump's emergency tariff system during oral argument this week, but it's unlikely they'll delve that deeply into the issue of what constitutes an emergency, legal expert Lisa Rubin told MSNBC's Joe Scarborough on Thursday.
That's because, she argued, there's a much easier and less politically fraught way they can strike down the tariffs.
"I'm curious ... the portions of the hearing Italked about, the portions, Ididn't talk hear as much about were lines of questions aboutthe administration's reallyspecious use of the wordemergency, of the termemergency," said Scarborough.
"Like, this is apresident who is claiming thatwhen he gets pissed off while he'swatching the world seriesbecause there's a commercial about Ronald Reagan, that thatconstitutes an emergency and thenext day, he can jack uptariffs on Canada. This is apresident who can get angrybecause his political ally, whotried to overthrow an electionin Brazil, is actually beingtried. And so he gets angry atjudges down there and thenjacks up tariffs to 50 percent. That'shis emergency. It has nothingto do with anything that's inthis statute. I'm curious, didthey press the solicitorgeneral on that point?"
"Not so hard," said Rubin. "Justice Kaganmentioned it at one point, andI think the reason they didn'tmention it, despite its appealto just common sense, right, isthat there's an easier way out of this."
"Justice Barrett issort of known on the courtright now for being the personwho seeks a solution that asmany people as possible canglom onto, and that solves aproblem before the court and isfew steps as possible, with asfew repercussions as possible.Really deciding the issuesquarely before her and nothingmore," Rubin continued. "And right now, I thinkthe easiest way to resolve thisdispute is on that plainlanguage of what does it meanto regulate importation?"
"If theauthority that the president isseeking is nowhere in thestatute to begin with, Joe,then you don't even have tohave that conversation aboutwhether or not there is anemergency, much less aconversation about how muchdeference is the president owedwhen he alone has authorityunder a statute to decidewhether there's that emergency," she added.