This is the fourth installment of my series on today's big tariff decision; see here, here, and here for the first three. I'll deal briefly here with the lone dissent by Justice Clarence Thomas, who also (along with Justice Samuel Alito) joined the main dissent by Justice Brett Kavanaugh, which argued that IEEPA's language invoked traditional tariff powers.

Thomas, as is so often his wont, wrote alone with bigger game in mind: to argue, against the majority's concern for presidential seizure of the most central congressional power, that a vast delegation of tariff power is actually "consistent with the separation of ...

© National Review