(C) Daily Kos This story was originally published by Daily Kos and is unaltered. . . . . . . . . . . Why did SCOTUS reverse course? [1] ['This Content Is Not Subject To Review Daily Kos Staff Prior To Publication.'] Date: 2026-02-24 SCOTUS’s 6 – 3 decision to block Trump’s tariffs requires an explanation. Why? Because the ‘conservative’* justices have consistently caved to Trump, consistently ruling in favor of Executive Branch sovereignty over Congress. The most egregious was Trump v. United States (July 2024), the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that former presidents have absolute immunity for actions within their core constitutional powers and presumptive immunity for all official acts. The question is ‘why did three ‘conservative’ justices rule against Trump’s tariffs in Learning Resources v. Trump. I recommend the Bulwark podcast with Andrew Weissman. Weissman was the architect of the case against Manafort. I’ll give a synopsis here. The majority decision was written by John Roberts. It said, in essence, that the tariffs are basically a tax and: The Constitution reserves taxation for Congress, not the Executive Branch. Congress may delegate certain of its powers to the Executive Branch but Trump had violated the “major questions” doctrine – the idea that if Congress wants to delegate the power to make decisions of vast economic or political significance, it must do so clearly. The International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) did not come close to delegating such powers; in fact, IEEPA never mentions taxes at all. Gorsuch wrote a 46 page concurrence (twice as long as Roberts’s opinion) expounding on the importance of the “major questions” doctrine. Barrett wrote a separate concurring opinion, that courts should think of the “major questions” doctrine not as a canon but instead as simply applying common sense to arrive at the “most natural reading of a statute.” Kavanaugh wrote a dissent joined by Thomas and Alito that IMHO makes no sense in a democratic republic. ‘Nuff said. The interesting parts of Roberts’s opinion were the many references he made to a concurring opinion of a 1952 ruling on Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer. President Truman had issued an Executive Order directing the Secretary of Commerce to seize and operate most US steel mills because of the Korean War emergency. SCOTUS found in a 6 – 3 opinion that Truman’s seizure of the steel mills was unconstitutional. That concurring opinion was written by Justice Robert Jackson, who had just returned from Nuernberg, where he was the U.S. Chief of Counsel for the prosecution of Nazi war criminals. Jackson laid out a three point test for Executive power that has been used ever since. His concurrence alluded to the series of ‘emergencies’ that the Nazis had declared in Germany, each leading to a further increase in executive power. Weissman was impressed with Roberts’s opinion. So was I, but who cares. The most profound question came at the end. Why did SCOTUS rule (6 – 3) that the President has immunity in the 2024 Trump v. United States case and then turn around after he’s been in office for a year and reverse course?? Yes, the details of the cases are different. However, the underlying theme, Executive vs. Congressional power is exactly identical. Why did Justices Roberts, Barrett, and Gorsuch run up a white flag and hightail it out of Dodge after a year of Trump rule? Weissman speculated that the three have now seen what before they had deemed impossible. But he admitted he had no explanation. I’m skeptical of that explanation because any educated person should have seen the handwriting on the wall (eg. Projekt 2025) and been able to predict exactly what we’ve experienced. But that’s just my opinion. What do you think? *’Conservative’ is a misnomer because conservatives are traditionally (and what’s a conservative if not traditional) leery of executive branch power. [END] --- [1] Url: https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2026/2/24/2370277/-Why-did-SCOTUS-reverse-course?pm_campaign=front_page&pm_source=more_community&pm_medium=web Published and (C) by Daily Kos Content appears here under this condition or license: Site content may be used for any purpose without permission unless otherwise specified. via Magical.Fish Gopher News Feeds: gopher://magical.fish/1/feeds/news/dailykos/