LyrArc Article Gist
US president's sweeping powers to use tariffs as a tool for policy when American people's jobs, communities, health, is threatened by fentanyl and concentration of manufacturing jobs in China, unfair trade by EU and Japan, is the issue presented to the US Supreme Court. The US president presented it in this way- tariffs as a foreign policy tool, not a way to impose economic policy in the form of a tax on American importers or buyers which is the power allocated to Congress by the US Constitution. Justices who mentioned these powers called them sweeping powers but would not say the word fentanyl or look back at the recalcitrant behaviour of Asian nations Japan and China when it comes to unfari trading practices, where the US could literally negotiate forever and get no result, or to the enormous concentration of manufacturing power and supply channels in China that not only ships out American jobs but leaves Americans at the mercy of foreign powers for cost of living. Nowhere was this more evident as during covid years and now in rare earths export restrictions from China. The Justices assumed it was just alright to ignore this or leave it unsaid.  The cost to American buyers is small because most of the tariffs are borne by foreign suppliers in China, Japan and Germany, who as in the case of automobiles unfairly benefitted for decades and are now bearing most of the cost of tariffs. The large business in the US have increased their margins so much in the 2020-2024 period that they are now bearing some of the cost of the tariffs, as reported in WSJ. So that inflation in the US is at 3.0 % in the US less than anticipated, when average tariffs are at about 10% overall, not what the headlines say of 15-20% because of the product exceptions made in the tariffs for each nation. Justice Roberts may be right when he says more care should be exercized in the placing of a tariff, but even Roberts and Justices Barrett, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and others know that the US has used this as a last resort, as a policy tool to protect the American people. Sweeping powers need care and caution as Justice Roberts stated- “power to impose tariffs on any product from any country in any amount for any length of time. It does seem like that’s a major authority."   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Amazon makes an offer to buy the whole of TikTok on April 1, 2025 before a April 1, 2025 deadline. A law passed in Congress in 2024 was upheld by the US Supreme Court requiring the sale of China based TikTok to American buyers for national security reasons or be closed to US users altogether. Amazon has connections to TikTok where TikTok users refer other users to products which can be bought on Amazon with revenue being passed on to influencers who get a cut on the transactions.

LyrArc Article Gist
Mass demonstrations by young people including school children on March 24, 2018, in many U.S. cities called for raising the minimum age for buying a gun from 18 to 21 years of age, and prohibiting civilian ownership of semiautomatic weapons, increasing comprehensive background checks. Former Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens says this is not enough. He calls for a repeal of the Second Amendment. Stevens points out that the the framers of the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution had the concern that a national standing army could pose a threat to the security of the separate states and therefore made the Second Amendment so that " a well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." This is now a relic of that period. He says for 200 years this was not interpreted to mean that gun control legislation could not be enacted, till a 2008 decision by the Supreme Court.  Stevens says the decision was wrong and repeal of the Second Amendment is needed.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The DJT Executive Order removing birthright citizenship on Jan 20, 2024 applies to future undocumented immigrants, and is based on the part of the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution passed in 1866 by the US Congress and ratified by states in 1868.  The 14th Amendment came after the US Civil War and was aimed at giving emancipated black slaves citizenship. The US Supreme Court gave US citizenship to one Chinese immigrant in US vs Wong in 1898 following the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882. This did not set a precedent as at that time immigration from Asia was extremely restricted and the case was not intended to apply to millions crossing borders as this did not exist. For most of the period 1900-1960 Asian immigration was negligible because of the laws in existence until the Kennedy administration. Immigration from Mexico was mainly for US agricultural farms. When this led to a surge in illegal crossing of the US Mexican border in 1944-1954 a similar situation to today existed when Eisenhower conducted Operation Wetback in 1954 to deport about 1 million undocumented immigrants. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The US supreme Court has to decide whether states can block access to treatments for transgender to persons under 18 years. This was an issue in the 2024 elections. Parents unease at not being informed about children at school and the social trends that add to the social tensions for a middle and working class already beset with cost of living concerns and childcare.

LyrArc Article Gist
Germany's DW.com looks at the influence of money in US elections. The Supreme Court decision in 2010 for Citizens United said First Amendment rights of free speech enshrined in the US Constitution were not based on the identity of the speaker as an individual or other entity. Corporations and unions were allowed the same rights of free speech. No limit was placed on contributions of companies. This has increased the influence of companies and corporate interests in US elections. This undermines public confidence in the election process. In one instance a billionaire said he would contribute $45 million a month to the former president's campaign. In one talk show the former president offered a position in his administration to that billionaire. In another instance a large Silicon Valley contributor offered large contributions to Harris-Walz and yet remained critical of Biden's choice of regulator Lina Khan at the Federal Trade Commission.  This shows the influence of companies in financing after 2010 is becoming more direct and blatant. Yet US has never had the kind of strict laws existing in Europe on election financing and not setup a public financing mechanism as in Europe. Even before Citizens United SC decision tech, pharmaceutical and oil companies lobbied heavily using the existing laws to their advantage to buy influence.    ...

LyrArc Article Gist
First disrupt the young people's attention and create effects on mental health of long hours spent on social media such as Tik Tok. This results in a loss of literacy on basic knowledge of civics and American history to lower and lower levels. Then let these young people decide who should run the country and its government for the next 4-8 years. The founders never intended this and never anticipated this threat. Congressmen Republican Gallagher of Wisconsin and Democrat Krisnamoorthi of Illinois introduced a bipartisan bill to ban TikTok in the US considering that it was foreign adversary application when its literacy effects are even more a concern. Byte Dance has appealed the law that goes into effect Jan 19, 2025. The appeal is now before a 3 person panel of the Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals of Sri Srinivasan, Neomi Rao, and Douglas Ginsburg. Does Byte Dance have recourse to the First Amendment rights in the US Constitution when the US sees Byte Dance as a foreign adversary controlled internet social media service, is the question before the Appeals Court and next before the US Supreme Court. The US government has shown the judges confidential classified data that shows why it thinks there is foreign adversary influence of some sort.  It is interesting to note that national literacy standards and the ability of average American young people to know enough about American history and civics that is in a dire state today and a key vulnerability for US democracy. This is gravely harmed by social media influence. Only negative effects on mental health of children and young girls has been put forward. Too many hours spent on social media is a negative influence which is why China and now Australia and UK have put restrictions on is use. US has none. India has banned Tik Tok for security reasons. In all situations there are negatives here yet it is an appalling thing that literacy is not the biggest one put forward when it should be for this Nation. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
US Business has considerable apprehension about the former president in 2024 compared to its willingness to consider Trump in 2016. At the time executives from investment bank Goldman Sachs and heads of oil companies joined the Trump administration. This time US business and corporate interests are apprehensive about becoming the target of a tweet they might find the next morning under a Trump administration. They are not supportive of student loan forgiveness, but when it comes to the CHIPS and Science Act they see president Biden as effective and helping industry. Business leaders have a negative view on the Trump effort through appointment of 3 Supreme Court Justices of overturning decades old rights of women on abortion, and on this issue alone many will support Harris-Walz, overriding other concerns they might have. The visions of Harris and Trump are so vastly different with one calling climate change a hoax and hyping up social issues and infrastructure needs without any record of delivery when in office, and the other a strong position on climate change, wages and income, delivering on infrastructure and CHIPS that US Business. The result is that it leaves US Business with no better option in 2024 than to support the vision  that takes America forward. There are different sections of the business community which have different priorities.  Silicon Valley, and oil, pharmaceuticals because it profits most from light regulation which brings with it social costs is a special issue not addressed here. Other business, banking, automobiles, and a range of other industries have other priorities yet also see the need for the economy and the US to move forward with a different vision than one that simply ignores climate change, and fails to address child care, child poverty, wide disparities in wealth, and other issues facing of wages, cost of living facing most Americans.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
It has happened before- the issues and the tactics. This article is from the Washington Post March 10, 1985. The 2016, 2020, and 2024 US campaign for president most resembles the 1952 campaign between Dwight Eisenhower and Adlai Stevenson. In that campaign Senators Joseph McCarthy of Wisconsin and Senator Jenner of Indiana made unfounded statements and criticism of of candidate Adlai Stevenson, of Gen. George Marshall, of NATO and aid to war ravaged Europe under the Marshall plan, and by 1958 of Eisenhower for "ruining the party," according to the Washington Post. Edward Jenner, Senator from Indiana 1952-1958, conducted Senate hearings in which he made spectacular criticism of public figures and US policy from 1953 to 1955. Eisenhower was elected as president in 1952 and after considering running as an Independent reluctantly accepted when New York Governor Dewey asked him to do on the Republican party ticket. What is similar is that the issues and tactics used now are reminiscent of issues and tactics in those days in the 1950's, that this is not happening for the first time- it is not new. Both Senator Taft who headed the Republican party at the time and president Eisenhower felt uneasy about this type of criticism. Then as today it was about aid to Europe and NATO. Jenner said America could not afford it and it "would bankrupt America." Jenner also called the US Supreme Court "the most powerful instrument of the communist global conquest by paralysis," and introduced a bill to limit the SC jurisdiction. Jenner said in 1951 on the Senate floor, according to the Washington Post-  "the only choice is to impeach Truman," as "this country is in the hands of a secret inner coterie directed by agents of the Soviet Union." Today's differences are not new, the rhetoric familiar, about NATO, Europe funding, about the SC, about this and the former president, and about isolationism and about extended costly foreign wars, all after a pandemic and climate change in an uneasy atmosphere about the threats to American leadership then from the Soviets now from China. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
On Jan 19, 2023 the US hit its debt ceiling of $31.4 trillion. Republicans control the House of Representatives by only a few votes after a strong showing in midterms by Democrats who control the Senate. A small section of the Republican party insists that raising the debt ceiling- a task performed by the House of Representatives- should only be done with serious cuts to Biden programs to help workers and families during a cost of living crisis. Biden says he will not negotiate, simply won't.  This report in NYT by Jim Tankersley, says president Biden in the last resort could resort to the 14th Amendment which says: "The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions shall not be questioned." What this means is that in the last resort if Republicans insist on serious cuts because of a faction within the party, and not because the whole party supports it, Mr. Biden could continue public borrowings to pay social security and make other payments. Moody's says this would lead to a rise in borrowing costs temporarily but would not lead to a recession, and have long term benefits as the debt ceiling could not be applied in the future. It would be challenged by Republicans and go to the Supreme Court which would have to decide on the issue: "the validity of the public debt of the United States shall not be questioned." This drew 1338 comments on NYT. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Interracial marraiges are increasing since the Supreme Court made antimiscegenation laws unconstituional in 1967. According to a new report by the Pew Research Center- based on historical data and Census Bureau information of the annual American Community Survey- 15% of all new marraiges in 2010 were between people of different race, ethnicity or color. This is double what it was in 1980. Of the total people married in 2010, 9% of whites, 17% of blacks, 26% of Hispanics and 28% of Asians were married outside of the ethnic and racial group. Interracial marraiges were more common in western states and in the northeastern U.S. compared to the southern and midwestern states. In the western states 22% of all marraiges were between people of different ethnic or racial groups or color. College educated people under 30 were the most open to interracial marraige.

LyrArc Article Gist
Arguments that are expected to be used by both sides before the U.S. Supreme Court on the health care law. At the heart of this is the 1942 decision, Wickard v. Filburn, on the limits of federal power. Mr. Filburn, was an Ohio farmer who questioned a 1938 federal law that imposed a penalty on every extra bushel of wheat on his farm beyond the stipulated amount. The decision was unanimous and went against Filburn. At issue is whether the federal government can impose a penalty on individuals for not buying health insurance. Justice Robert Jackson wrote in that case: "Even if appellee's activity be local, and though it may not be regarded as commerce, it may still, whatever its nature, be reached by Congress, if it exerts a substantial economic effect on commerce." The Obama administration's argument in its brief is that the decision of individuals not to buy insurance, like that of Filburn to plant that extra bushel, has larger effects beyond the local one and serious consequences for the whole country- it raises insurance rates of people in states across the country and makes hospitals bear the burden of caring for these uninsured people. For over 50 years the Supreme Court has largely supported the idea behind the Filburn decision, except in 1995 and 2000- these two decision invalidated laws made about guns near schools and violence against women. The Court ruled that the activities were local and noncommercial and beyond the federal power to regulate interstate commerce....

LyrArc Article Gist
A critical part of the Affordable Care Act is the setup of marketplaces or exchanges to let people without insurance buy individual health plans. Some states setup their own exchanges, and some states let the federal government step in and run them. To help the lower middle class and poor the Act provides health subsidies to buy insurance in the exchanges, and 85% of customers in the exchanges qualify for this benefit. The U.S. Supreme Court voted 6-3 in 2015, compared to a tight vote in 2012 on the Affordable Care Act, to maintain the health subsidies. Justice Roberts wrote the majority opinion, saying "Congress passed the Affordable Care Act to improve health insurance markets, not destroy them." Justice Scalia dissented calling it "interpretive jiggery-pokery." Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito Jr. dissented. Voting in favor were Justices Anthony Kennedy, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, Justice Kennedy dissented in the 2000 case. The challengers petition to the courts was based on a reading of phrases in the Affordable Act which had not occurred to the writers of the law. The reading suggests only people enrolled in state setup exchanges are eligible for subsidies. If the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs the 6.4 million Americans who are enrolled in the federal exchanges would lose the subsidies provided under the law and lose health insurance. And the economic foundations of the Affordable Act would be undermined with insurance companies required to provide insurance to all regardless of pre-existing conditions and subsidies removed, leaving the companies with sicker pool of customers resulting in destabilizing the exchanges and higher premiums. The court ruled in favor of an interpretation that is compatible with the whole law and the intentions of the statute to help the middle class and the poor buy health insurance. The chaos in the insurance markets that would result in going with the plaintiffs because of a careless writing of a phrase, was uppermost in the majority's mind. Chief Justice Roberts emphasized this, saying- "The statutory scheme compels us to reject petitioners' interpretation, because it would destabilize the individual insurance market in any state with a federal exchange and likely create the very 'death spirals' that Congress designed the act to avoid." This case originated with 4 plaintiffs from Virginia who challenged the IRS regulation that said subsidies were allowed regardless of whether the exchanges were run by the state or the federal government, arguing that this was at odds with the particular phrase in the law that was ambiguous about federal exchanges eligibility for health subsidies. Judge Roger Gregory of the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Virgina, ruled that the phrase was indeed ambiguous, but the IRS was owed deference in its opinion. Chief Justice Roberts made it clear that this was not a case for the IRS, saying "it is instead our task to determine the correct reading." ...

LyrArc Article Gist
A small group of founders of the Pay Pal company Sacks, Thiel and Musk  are only a small fraction of the larger tech universe that includes Apple, Google and Amazon and other technology companies in many industries including auto, aerospace, chips, other manufacturing,  possibly no more than 10--20%. They are now enabled by US Supreme Court decisions to allow business supported PAC's to operate freely to influence political events in 2024 for promoting their own business interests.  The influence operates through social media channels in ways that limit verifying of information because of the speed with which information can be posted on the internet. This has created new challenges for 2024 and the American system of representative government enshrined in the words in the preamble of the Constitution about  "We the People" - "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America." ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Total public and private spending on health care in the U.S. will increase by 6.1% in 2014 compared to 2014 in a revised Commerce Department forecast. The total spending will reach $4.1 trillion in 2014 from $3.9 trillion in 2013. Some of the lower rise in spending than the earlier 7.4% forecast will come from 28 states opting out of Medicaid expansion under the health care overhaul because of a June 2012 Supreme Court ruling. Employers are trying to reduce costs and the public is reducing spending because of the recession. Less generous health plans mean users are paying more out of their own pocket, paying more attention to prices and even postponing care. Growth in health care costs is a about 3.9% a year since 2009 following the recession. The costs increase in 2015 by 5.8%, in 2018 by 5.9% and 2022 by 6.5%, according to U.S. government forecasts, because of enrollment in Medicare for baby boomers. This is still higher than the inflation rate of below 2%.

LyrArc Article Gist
The Nation is faced with another Supreme Court decision as in 1868 for the 14th Amendment, in 2025 on birthright citizenship.  The 14th Amendment was written in the 19th century it had no concept of the 20th century and absolutely no idea of the 21st century we live in, unable to even conceive of conditions today, or even think of  setting rules for immigration today. It rejected the Dredd Scott decision of 1857 denying black people rights as citizens, restating the law of the land, had nothing at all to do with stating the opinion of the Judiciary on whether a mother flying in from Asia could secure US citizenship for a new born child by merely visiting the US. As in 1857, in 2025 the law is based on assumed historical facts as Lincoln said on Dredd Scott decision, that are not really true. Lincoln said in 1857- "That burlesque upon judicial decisions, and slander and profanation upon the honored names, and sacred history of republican America must be overruled, and expunged from the books of authority." The 14th Amendment was written to give black people the rights of citizens of the US, in a complete repudiation of the Dred Scott decision of the US Supreme Court of 1857 that deprived black people of rights as citizens because Judge Tanney said the British Empire had set up the institution of slavery in the American colonies and the British were responsible for the institution, little we can do about it. When by 1807 slavery was being banned in Britain and in 1838 totally banned in the British Empire. It created the idea that Americans were not the master of their destinies after the departure of the British to choose which institutions they would keep and which they would reject including slavery. Abraham Lincoln citing President Andrew Jackson said each the executive, the judiciary, Congress, and the common man were entitled to their own view of the US Constitution as they understood it. Lincoln also said Judge Tanney's decision in Dred Scott case was based on assumed historical facts that were not really true- Judge Tanney making no mention of the fact that in 1857 the British Empire had already abolished the institution for 50 years. The DJT Executive Order banning birthright citizenship shown here on the White House site has the title- Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship. It is written in  simple language in 1 page -Purpose, Policy, Enforcement and Definitions, Provisions.  The purpose clearly states that the Dred Scott decision of the US Supreme Court in 1857 is what the framers of the 14th Amendment had in mind when they drafted the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution. A reading of the 14th Amendment makes this abundantly clear. The wording comes out at the outset reversing the Dredd Scott Decision of 1857. It's repudiation was why the Northern and Southern States fought the Civil War. The National Archives say that with Dred Scott decision to allow the spread of slavery to American territories in the West,  America moved one step closer to civil war. With such  momentous events in the history of the US 1857-1868 the framers of the 14th Amendment were not sitting down to write rules about what was right for America a century and a half later.    ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The trade deficit with China has led to loss of 3.8 million jobs, 75% of them or 2.9 million in manufacturing. Go back to 1990 and Beijing was a city of bicycles not cars. If Beijing shifted to a open economy and simply imported products from the US and Europe as it had done since 1700 it would have remained a backward agricultural economy. It took 20 years of focused effort after 2000 for China with US technological assistance to excel in manufacturing, as the US had done after 1920. Can or cannot the US excel in Manufacturing with its own focused effort and restore jobs and decent wages to the American people, that is the question. That a $1 trillion deficit that has already destroyed the US manufacturing and its capacity to defend itself by rapidly building up the US Navy, is that not an emergency, then what is, is also the question, and the role, the duty, of the president of the US in such a situation. The federal appeals court has allowed the DJT Tariffs to remain in place till it goes to the US Supreme Court. Today May 30 the WSJ in a front page article shown here says the one California shipyard could assemble a supply ship in 5 days in 1942. China's independence in the fight against Imperial Japan and the Kwantung Army's adventures, and the independence of Europe in the 1940's depended on this vital US capacity. Is this forgotten? FDR acted step by step by 1938 to restore the US lost capacity at that time, what is the role of the president today? ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The Fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals granted a U.S. administration request staying the effect of a lower court ruling, giving the government the $3.6 billion in U.S. Defense Department funds to build a border wall. This money goes towards the goal of building 500 miles of the wall by the end of 2020. In a 2-1 decision the court majority cited a Supreme Court order from July 2019 that gave the Trump administration the go ahead to use military funds for border wall construction.

The $3.6 billion is part of a $6.7 billion plan of spending under an emergency declaration by president Trump on grounds of border security. So far 100 miles of border wall have replaced flimsier construction barriers that existed. The government now needs to convince private land owners along large stretches of the border along the Rio Grande and other areas to give up their land for the wall. 

LyrArc Article Gist
Diversity support is dropping among CEO's with the new DJT administration taking office in 2025. Diversity is also losing support nationally. PEW Research shows nationally 52% support it in 2024 compared to 56% in early 2023. Among Republicans the shift is pronounced disapproval of Diversity up to 42% from 20% in the same period. Dhillon's law firm represented a social media activist Starbucks who launched campaigns against corporate Diversity policies during his campaign for Congress from Tennessee. DJT says Dhillon has a history of “suing corporations who use woke policies to discriminate against their workers."

CEO's appear to be saying they were not enthusiastic about such policies in the first place. The shift in sentiment nationally and the US Supreme Court decision against affirmative action in colleges has led to this shift in business CEO thinking.

LyrArc Article Gist
Ruth Igielnik of the NYT says judicial elections in Wisconsin have always been non partisan. The politicization is recent since 2011. In 1990 there was little correlation between court picks and partisan races, today the correlation is almost exactly, as she shows on a graph. State Supreme Court election results in Wisconsin and US presidential election results have become increasingly correlated from 0.3 in 1990 to 0.95 in 2023.

LyrArc Article Gist
On Canada's Justin Trudeau- looking back at his 10 years 2015-2025 mostly inherited the work of his father. He tackled Covid, improved childcare, tackled the renegotiation of trade with Republicans in the US, but lacked the major achievement of the 1970's of Pierre Trudeau setting up Canada as an independent state. The Washington Post looks at the political career of Justin Trudeau. He is the son of former prime minister Pierre Trudeau, a politician from Quebec, who was prime minister from 1968 to 1984 except for one year in 1979-1980. During that period Pierre Trudeau a lawyer practicing labour law in Montreal and educated at the University of Montreal had three significant accomplishments. Canada Act of 1982 passed into law by Queen Elizabeth and the British Parliament, set up Canada as a sovereign state. Prior to this only the British Parliament could amend the Canadian Constitution under the Dominion Act of 1867 under Queen Victoria. As a Quebeker Pierre Trudeau succeeded highly respected Lester Pearson as head of the Liberal Party, and held off the Party Quebecois's effort for separatism in the early 1980's. By 1981 the Canadian Supreme Court 9-0 rejected the Party Quebecois bills that conflicted with the Charter of Rights set up under the Canada Act which protected minorities in Quebec having education in English.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Will quick exchanges between Kagan and Justice Scalia during a Supreme Court hearing related to campaign financing in which Kagan told Scalia he was wrong, lead to poor relations on the bench, asks one legal expert.

LyrArc Article Gist
The background of Elena Kagan at Harvard Law School and her manner of navigating the internal politics of Harvard and dealing with the University head at the time, Obama economic advisor Lawrence Summers. The picture of an intensely motivated person who put in long hours to build rapport with Harvard Law faculty in her position as Dean of the Law School.