From WNYC Studios. I'm Brian Lehrer. This is my daily politics podcast. It's Thursday,

November 6th. Oral arguments at the Supreme Court over the legal basis of the Trump administration's tariff policies.

Since the start of Trump's second term, as many of you know, the president has made tariffs central

to his strategy to raise revenue for the country. That's one reason, but also bring manufacturers

back to the United States. That's the one he generally leans on, but also, as many

of you already know, to put pressure on the leaders of both friendly and adversarial nations alike

to do whatever he wants them to do, and not just on trade, but to bend to his will on many

kinds of things, even domestic politics in their own countries, where the tariffs are in effect

just a fine for not obeying in advance.

But the legal foundation for these tariffs is a question.

The Constitution gives Congress the power to impose tariffs explicitly.

Trump invoked emergency powers under a 1977 law that has never before been used to impose tariffs,

in which he argues that Congress delegated tariff powers to the president.

Now, during nearly three hours of oral argument yesterday, the court appeared deeply concerned

with Trump's reliance on this law, with even several members of

the court's conservative wing picking apart the administration's position in a case that could

have sweeping implications for the economy and also democracy, particularly presidential power.

We're going to hear a little of Justice Gorsuch. We're going to hear a little of Chief

Justice Roberts. As joining me now with analysis of the oral arguments heard by the Supreme Court

is Aziz Huck, Professor of Law at the University of Chicago Law School and author of The Rule

of Law, a very short introduction. Professor Huck, always great to have you on the show.

Welcome back to WNYC.

...