r/politics • u/sweatycat New York • 1d ago

California to Negotiate Trade With Other Countries to Bypass Trump Tariffs

https://www.newsweek.com/california-newsom-trade-trump-tariffs-2055414
92.0k Upvotes

93% Upvoted

6.5k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

49

u/GearBrain Florida 1d ago

Is it? Section 10 of the US Constitution:

Section 10: Powers Denied to the States

No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.

No State shall, without the Consent of the Congress, lay any Imposts or Duties on Imports or Exports, except what may be absolutely necessary for executing it's inspection Laws: and the net Produce of all Duties and Imposts, laid by any State on Imports or Exports, shall be for the Use of the Treasury of the United States; and all such Laws shall be subject to the Revision and Controul of the Congress.

No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any Duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.

Section 8, however:

Section 8: Powers of Congress

The Congress shall have Power To ...

To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

As a layperson, it would appear to me that the Constitution does not prohibit a State from entering into a trade agreement. I would assume it would fall under "regulate Commerce with foreign Nations", but words don't mean anything anymore, so Newsome can just give Congress the bird and do it anyway.

27

u/SpaceGangsta Utah 1d ago

No State shall, without the Consent of the Congress, lay any Imposts or Duties on Imports or Exports, except what may be absolutely necessary for executing it's inspection Laws: and the net Produce of all Duties and Imposts, laid by any State on Imports or Exports, shall be for the Use of the Treasury of the United States; and all such Laws shall be subject to the Revision and Controul of the Congress.

I think that says they can’t.

12

u/HowDoIEvenEnglish 1d ago

Negotiating exemptions from tariffs levied on American exports isn’t actually “lay[ing] any imposts or duties on imports or exports”

They also aren’t taking funds away from the fed.

CA cannot stop tariffs from being applied to imports coming into CA. That is clear. But there’s nothing in this passage that prevents them from negotiating exemptions with foreign nations as long as they don’t interfere with federal policy.

8

u/MissionCreeper 1d ago

Honestly, I'd say they can refuse to collect the tariffs.  "Ship to this port controlled by California, we will collect the duties as they existed prior to the EO, and ignore Trump's new ones" Congress didn't pass the tariffs.  Constitution says they have to do it.

3

u/sirhoracedarwin 1d ago

I think those are federal employees that work the ports

3

u/linguist-in-westasia 1d ago

Ports of entry have federal customs personnel...bypassing them would give the federal government a legal reason to increase their presence in the state at and around ports, which they already have...

1

u/MissionCreeper 1d ago

Hm, yeah thats a tough one.  Legislate payments to customs officials in exchange for ignoring illegal orders?  Is it a bribe if you initiate a payment to someone to not do something illegal?

1

u/HowDoIEvenEnglish 1d ago

Wel sure but that’s just ignoring an illegal law. So legally there are no tariffs to ignore. And such an action would likely be blocked by courts until matter was settled. A state can’t choose to ignore legal tariffs, and aren’t ports of entry run by federal agents anyway, so it’s not like they have to listen to newsome.