The Trump administration's sweeping tariff plan may be on shaky ground after a Supreme Court

hearing focused on his authority to impose the measures.

Several justices on the court questioned the legality of the tariffs and how much power

the president has to broadly enact his agenda.

Here's Justice Neil Gorsuch with U.S. Solicitor General John Sauer.

What would prohibit Congress from just abdicating all responsibility to regulate foreign commerce,

for that matter, declare war, to the president?

We don't contend that he could do that.

Why not?

Well, because we're dealing with a statute again that has a whole situation. I'm not asking about the statute.

General, I'm not asking about the statute.

I'm asking for your theory of the Constitution.

Meanwhile, attorney Neil Kachall is arguing for small businesses challenging the tariffs,

said the case was about more than the president's agenda.

This case is not about the president.

It's about the presidency.

It's not about partisanship. It's about the presidency. It's not about partisanship.

It's about principle. And above all, it's about upholding the majestic separation of powers

laced into our Constitution that is the foundation for our government.

The case will have major implications for the global economy and the limits of future

president's power. For more on this, I'm joined by the NewsHour's Supreme Court analyst. That is Amy Howe of

SCOTUS blog. Good to see you. Good to see you, too. So before we jump into what happened today,

...