✏️ Legal Pad
The Supreme Court has agreed to hear a case that could reshape how the President uses tariffs and, by extension, how much power the Executive Branch holds over international trade. The dispute stems from Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act, the same Cold War-era provision the Trump Administration used to impose sweeping tariffs on steel and aluminum in 2018. This sounds incredibly boring (and, in a sense, it is) but it can have profound implications for the country on the world stage.
The challengers argue that Section 232 gives the President virtually unchecked authority to tax imports whenever he deems it a “national security” concern. In their view, that’s a delegation of legislative power so broad that it violates the Constitution’s separation of powers. The government counters that the statute simply gives the Executive flexibility in a fast-moving global market, which is a necessity.
The Court’s decision could mark the biggest test of the “nondelegation doctrine” in decades: the principle that Congress can’t hand over its core lawmaking powers to the Executive Branch. A ruling that reins in that authority would be one of the most significant recalibrations of economic and constitutional power in recent years.
Tariffs may sound like policy, but this case is about something deeper: the limits of government discretion. How much authority can be delegated before accountability disappears? And how many decisions that affect millions can be made by one person, with no real check beyond their own definition of “security”?
In the language of trade, this case is about balance- not between imports and exports, but between branches of government.
💡 Sidebar
Last week, I wrote about two of my favorite Greenville spots closing. This week, the other side of the coin landed heads up- Scoundrel, the modern French brasserie downtown headed by Chef Joe Cash, became Greenville’s first-ever restaurant to earn a Michelin Star (and one of only four in the entire state).
If you’ve eaten there, you know: every dish, every detail, every plate placement is deliberate. Earning a star isn’t just about good food; it’s about consistency of excellence. The balance of the cocktails. The light on the table. The timing between courses. There’s no margin for error, and the same is true in trial work.
Perfect service and a perfect closing share the same ingredients: precision, timing, and the ability to make something impossibly difficult look effortless. One misstep, in flavor or fact, and the illusion of perfection collapses like a bad soufflé.
Greenville losing some of its best and gaining a Michelin star in the same week feels like a step back followed by a leap forward. It’s a reminder that excellence and fragility live side by side. In restaurants, as in courtrooms, mastery doesn’t mean avoiding mistakes; it means caring enough to make fewer of them.
⚖️ Closing Arguments
Last weekend marked the end of daylight saving time: that special time of year when the government reaches into our lives and quietly steals an hour of sunlight. They’ll tell you it’s for our benefit, that it’s temporary, that we’ll get it back eventually. But when you get to the office in the pitch black and leave in the pitch black., it’s hard not to feel like the ultimate government taking.
This year, I’m certifying a class: Alderson et al. v. United States, for unlawful taking under the Fifth Amendment. The property seized: one (1) hour of sunlight, to be valued at not less than golden-hour mid-summer rates. Damages: collective seasonal depression, disrupted circadian rhythms, toddlers waking up at 4:00 AM, and an uptick in impulse purchases of patio heaters. Relief sought: the prompt return of our hour, plus the Monday after the Superbowl becoming a National Holiday.
Here's to fighting the good fight for the good light.
Court is in recess-see you next Friday.
