No Result
View All Result
  • About us
  • Contact us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms & Conditions
Smart Investment Today
  • News
  • Economy
  • Editor’s Pick
  • Investing
  • Stock
  • News
  • Economy
  • Editor’s Pick
  • Investing
  • Stock
No Result
View All Result
Smart Investment Today
No Result
View All Result
Home Editor's Pick

Greenland, Tariffs, and America’s “Emergency” Emergency

by
January 23, 2026
in Editor's Pick
0
Greenland, Tariffs, and America’s “Emergency” Emergency
0
SHARES
0
VIEWS
Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

Scott Lincicome

My latest column at The Dispatch examines what President Trump’s now-canceled Greenland tariff threat says about not only US trade policy but also the increasing use and abuse of “emergency” powers by the executive branch (and not just Trump). 

Summarizing previous Cato research, I note that the 1976 Senate special committee charged with emergency powers reform was appalled that four national emergencies were in effect at that time, yet “today we live under 50 active national emergencies, several of which date back decades and all of which unlock broad executive powers—under IEEPA mainly but also several other US laws—that are typically reserved to Congress or delegated to the president in a much narrower fashion.” Here’s the full list:

As the table above shows, emergency rule is an endemic, bipartisan affliction, with Trump responsible for just 16 of the 50 national emergencies now in force. Yet the table also shows that Trump is a clear abuser of the law, and his IEEPA tariffs—and now the Greenland threat—reveal three big problems with the current “emergency” system: 

First, the vague and open-ended definition of “national emergency” has, along with extreme court deference, allowed the president to declare almost anything an “emergency” and then unlock vast powers that can be completely unrelated to the emergency at hand. Thus, for example, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent explained that, even though there’s no imminent risk of a Chinese or Russian invasion of Greenland, “emergency” tariffs on imports of NATO allies were lawful and appropriate because “[t]he national emergency is avoiding a national emergency.”
Second, once declared, emergencies are almost impossible for Congress to end, because resolutions to end them would need to be passed with veto-proof majorities.
Third, each major political party loses interest in pushing for limits on presidential power when its representative occupies the White House. In fact, many congressional Republicans who have for years supported reforms to presidential tariff and emergency powers are now silent about Trump’s “emergency” tariffs (or even cheering them on). 

If Trump’s Greenland push isn’t sufficient motivation for congressional reform, then what will be?

You can read the whole thing here.

Previous Post

Whom Should Farmers Believe: The President or Their Lying Eyes?

    Stay updated with the latest news, exclusive offers, and special promotions. Sign up now and be the first to know! As a member, you'll receive curated content, insider tips, and invitations to exclusive events. Don't miss out on being part of something special.


    By opting in you agree to receive emails from us and our affiliates. Your information is secure and your privacy is protected.

    • Trending
    • Comments
    • Latest

    Gold Prices Rise as the Dollar Slowly Dies

    May 25, 2024

    Richard Murphy, The Bank of England, And MMT Confusion

    March 15, 2025

    We Can’t Fix International Organizations like the WTO. Abolish Them.

    March 15, 2025

    Free Markets Promote Peaceful Cooperation and Racial Harmony

    March 15, 2025

    Using Carl Menger’s Insights To Understand Jew-Gentile Polarizations

    0

    Ana-Maria Coaching Marks Milestone with New Book Release

    0

    New Bonded Warehouse Facilities Launched in Immingham

    0

    From Corporate Burnout to High-Performance Coach: Anna Mosley’s Inspiring Journey with ‘Eighty’

    0
    Greenland, Tariffs, and America’s “Emergency” Emergency

    Greenland, Tariffs, and America’s “Emergency” Emergency

    January 23, 2026
    Whom Should Farmers Believe: The President or Their Lying Eyes?

    Whom Should Farmers Believe: The President or Their Lying Eyes?

    January 23, 2026
    Friday Feature: Curious and Kind Education

    Friday Feature: Curious and Kind Education

    January 23, 2026
    Scarlett Johansson and Cate Blanchett back campaign accusing AI firms of ‘theft’

    Scarlett Johansson and Cate Blanchett back campaign accusing AI firms of ‘theft’

    January 23, 2026

    Recent News

    Greenland, Tariffs, and America’s “Emergency” Emergency

    Greenland, Tariffs, and America’s “Emergency” Emergency

    January 23, 2026
    Whom Should Farmers Believe: The President or Their Lying Eyes?

    Whom Should Farmers Believe: The President or Their Lying Eyes?

    January 23, 2026
    Friday Feature: Curious and Kind Education

    Friday Feature: Curious and Kind Education

    January 23, 2026
    Scarlett Johansson and Cate Blanchett back campaign accusing AI firms of ‘theft’

    Scarlett Johansson and Cate Blanchett back campaign accusing AI firms of ‘theft’

    January 23, 2026
    • About us
    • Contact us
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms & Conditions

    Copyright © 2025 smartinvestmenttoday.com | All Rights Reserved

    No Result
    View All Result
    • News
    • Economy
    • Editor’s Pick
    • Investing
    • Stock

    Copyright © 2025 smartinvestmenttoday.com | All Rights Reserved