Trending Now
Licensing Cartelists Say the Quiet Part Out Loud...
Silent Cal Had a Lot to Say
Critics of Capitalism Misunderstand Economic Success
Methodological Individualism in Historical Analysis
How Government Ruins 4th of July Travel
Unemployment Claims Reach the Highest Since 2018 (Ex...
The Young Rothbard: An Uncomfortable Neoclassical Economist
A Big Beautiful Bill for the Military-Industrial Complex
Restructure or Repeal? What’s the Best Way to...
Ruling Against Ohio Scholarship Program Puts System Above...
  • About Us
  • Contacts
  • Email Whitelisting
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms and Conditions
DailyProfitTips.com
  • Editor’s Pick
  • Economy
  • Investing
  • Politics
  • World News
Editor's PickInvesting

Emergency Powers Are for Emergencies

by July 1, 2025
July 1, 2025

Jeffrey Miron

trump inauguration

On June 3, Keith Johnson of Foreign Policy speculated that the Trump administration, after two bruising court defeats, was eyeing Section 122 of the 1974 Trade Act—a clause that has never been used—to keep its tariff war alive. The provision allows for up to 15 percent tariffs to address “balance-of-payment” emergencies, barring Congress from intervention for up to five months.

Trade is just one sector in which Congress has granted the president virtually unilateral authority; similar cases include immigration and industrial policy. Both followed a similar script, with presidents granted broad powers for catastrophes both real and imagined. 

This creeping presidential latitude did not appear overnight; its roots trace to the Founding era, when Alexander Hamilton’s Federalist 70 extolled the virtues of “energy in the executive.” Hamilton argued that providing the executive with some leeway would buy Congress time as it gathered and deliberated; speed, not policy preference, was to be the motive. Now, however, presidents use the freedom Congress has afforded them to circumvent legislative deadlocks and strong-arm trading partners. What began as a fire axe behind glass has turned into a Swiss army knife for routine politics.

That evolution is easy to spot in the historical record. The 1950 Defense Production Act, born to rush steel and rubber to Korea, now underwrites peacetime interventions from baby-formula shortages to COVID-19 swabs. Moreover, Section 232 of the 1962 Trade Expansion Act, intended to keep Soviet metal out of missile silos, propped up the 2018 tariffs on Canadian steel and aluminum. These episodes show how emergency statutes—drafted for specific, short-lived crises—can balloon into standing licenses far beyond their original scope. At the same time, Hamilton’s argument may have an element of truth—perhaps a few situations do require swift executive action. So when, if ever, should Congress delegate “emergency” power to the president?

Identifying hard-and-fast rules for executive authority is difficult, but certain changes might help: replacing elastic phrases like “national security” or “balance-of-payments” with concrete triggers; setting sunset dates that restore powers to Congress; and requiring presidents to identify why their actions meet statutory triggers. None of these measures is foolproof, but they potentially restore a measure of oversight without sacrificing the speed that Hamilton wanted.

A more aggressive reform would eliminate emergency powers entirely (since some presidents will inevitably cross anything less than a bright line). The objection to this approach is that, in some cases, a president might genuinely need emergency power. In those instances, however, Congress will likely vote such power quickly, since in true emergencies the facts are clear and convincing. This is what happened in response to Japan’s attack on Pearl Harbor in December 1941. The first fleet of Japanese bombers and fighters attacked at 1:48 p.m. EST on December 7, 1941; Congress voted for a declaration of war at 12:30 p.m. EST on December 8, less than 24 hours later. More broadly, the country thrived for many decades before the creation of most emergency powers. It can do so as well, going forward.

This article appeared on Substack on July 1, 2025. Jonah Karafiol, a student at Harvard College, co-wrote this post.

previous post
NFA to resume corn procurement
next post
Ruling Against Ohio Scholarship Program Puts System Above Students

Related Posts

Licensing Cartelists Say the Quiet Part Out Loud...

July 1, 2025

Restructure or Repeal? What’s the Best Way to...

July 1, 2025

Ruling Against Ohio Scholarship Program Puts System Above...

July 1, 2025

NFA to resume corn procurement

July 1, 2025

11 renewable projects gain green-lane status in June

July 1, 2025

Offshore wind developers asked to disclose plans for...

July 1, 2025

ATEC launches Cabuyao semiconductor plant built for Taiwan’s...

July 1, 2025

Misdeclared shipments of onion, mackerel from China intercepted

July 1, 2025

PHL investment position minus $69.3B in Q1

July 1, 2025

Gov’t cash utilization rate hits 94% in May

July 1, 2025
Enter Your Information Below To Receive Free Trading Ideas, Latest News And Articles.

    Your information is secure and your privacy is protected. By opting in you agree to receive emails from us. Remember that you can opt-out any time, we hate spam too!
    • About Us
    • Contacts
    • Email Whitelisting
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms and Conditions

    Copyright © 2025 DailyProfitTips.com All Rights Reserved.

    DailyProfitTips.com
    • Editor’s Pick
    • Economy
    • Investing
    • Politics
    • World News