Menu
Sign In Search Podcasts Charts People & Topics Add Podcast API Pricing
Podcast Image

The NPR Politics Podcast

Supreme Court poised to rule on tariffs, birthright citizenship and more

07 Jan 2026

Transcription

Chapter 1: What is the main topic discussed in this episode?

0.031 - 9.721 Unknown

Support for NPR and the following message come from Jarl and Pamela Moan, thanking the people who make public radio great every day, and also those who listen.

0

10.802 - 20.212 Juliana

Hi, this is Juliana in Seattle, Washington, and I'm currently on my way to my first day of law school. Ooh, congratulations. This podcast was recorded at 1.22 p.m.

0

20.653 - 23.035 Tamara Keith

on Wednesday, the 7th of January.

0

23.295 - 29.582 Juliana

Things may have changed by the time you listen to this, but I will still be in the library, nose deep in my massive law books. Enjoy the show.

0

33.005 - 43.147 Tamara Keith

There's so much reading in that first year. May the force be with you. Hey there, it's the NPR Politics Podcast. I'm Tamara Keith. I cover the White House. I'm Carrie Johnson. I cover the Justice Department.

43.368 - 46.575 Mara Liasson

And I'm Mara Liason, Senior National Political Correspondent.

46.825 - 70.544 Tamara Keith

And today on the show, we are talking about some of the major decisions expected to come from the U.S. Supreme Court in the days, weeks and months ahead. The court has indicated it could release its first opinions of the year as early as Friday. Kerry, one opinion that we are watching for and could get on Friday concerns President Trump's tariffs policy. Remind us of the key issue here.

70.825 - 93.598 Carrie Johnson

Yeah. Central part of Trump's agenda, the sweeping tariff plan. He put it into place early in his administration and he's relying on a law from the 1970s called the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. even though that law does not mention the word tariffs and it has not been used for that purpose since it was established by Congress.

94.019 - 112.685 Carrie Johnson

And so the big question here is whether that law can carry the weight of all of these tariffs the president has imposed. It's important to note that when this case was argued before the Supreme Court, even some of the conservative justices expressed concern about it and how much power it gave the executive branch.

Chapter 2: What major Supreme Court decisions are expected this year?

234.323 - 249.067 Carrie Johnson

There are a bunch of off-ramps the court could take here. They could rule very narrowly, allowing Trump to use different laws or statutes to reimpose tariffs. And they could rule in ways that would only affect monies moving forward.

0

249.107 - 261.867 Carrie Johnson

Remember, at oral argument, Justice Amy Coney Barrett, a Trump appointee, raised a question about whether it would be really a complete mess to try to figure out how to give money back that had already been collected. So

0

261.847 - 274.337 Carrie Johnson

We're going to have to wait and see how narrowly the court rules here, but the administration could have other options, even if the court majority rules out the use of this particular law from the 1970s.

0

274.756 - 282.645 Tamara Keith

Carrie, this is one of several cases before the court this term that are central to Trump's agenda. What are the others that you're watching? Yeah.

0

282.786 - 302.69 Carrie Johnson

First off, let's talk about Trump versus Cook. Cook is Lisa Cook, a member of the Federal Reserve Board, and President Trump wants to fire her. He basically says that she may have committed mortgage fraud earlier before she got appointed to this board. Lisa Cook herself has said that allegation is baseless and she has not been charged with any wrongdoing.

304.032 - 311.08 Carrie Johnson

Members of the Fed are appointed for 14-year terms and they're appointed that way to try to insulate them from political pressure.

Chapter 3: How could Trump's tariff policy impact the Supreme Court's ruling?

311.12 - 328.337 Carrie Johnson

The law that created this board basically allows the president to remove people for cause. The question is whether there is good cause for Trump to remove Lisa Cook. So far, lower courts, the district court and the federal appeals court, have said no, and they've kept her in place on the job.

0

328.757 - 339.778 Carrie Johnson

But Trump's envoy to the Supreme Court Solicitor General, John Sauer, basically is arguing that courts cannot second guess a president's decision about what cause might mean.

0

339.758 - 356.721 Mara Liasson

But what's so interesting about this, Carrie, is that he is not saying, I can fire anybody on the Federal Reserve for cause or not for cause. He's not saying that. He's saying, I have cause. I'm playing within the rules. On this one, he isn't saying that the whole system should be thrown over so that the executive can make any decision he wants.

0

356.735 - 362.883 Carrie Johnson

Well, that's in part because the Federal Reserve is so important to monetary policy and to his continued success.

0

362.943 - 377.342 Mara Liasson

Right. But that's what's so interesting about this. He wants the ability to put people in the Federal Reserve that will lower interest rates. But if he does that, he might get inflation. So here's another case of the Supreme Court maybe saving Trump from himself.

377.508 - 389.679 Tamara Keith

It's a political and economic high wire. Carrie, another one is birthright citizenship. President Trump signed an executive order when he came into office attempting to ban birthright citizenship. He did.

389.859 - 413.906 Carrie Johnson

And, you know, that would be an earthquake for federal law. After the Civil War, the Constitution was amended to make clear in the 14th Amendment that all persons born or naturalized in the U.S. and subject to the jurisdiction thereof are citizens of the U.S., And since then, for over 100 years, the understanding is that, yes, if you're born here on American soil, you are an American citizen.

414.387 - 437.355 Carrie Johnson

President Trump and his administration are arguing that part of the 14th Amendment only applies to newly freed slaves and their children, not the children of migrants. That would really upend democracy. most law professors' understanding of the 14th Amendment and could be a totally revolutionary view of immigration law and the Constitution.

437.635 - 444.252 Mara Liasson

And presidential power. He's saying, I don't care what the Constitution says. The president should be able to decide who can be a citizen.

Comments

There are no comments yet.

Please log in to write the first comment.