Learning Resources v. Trump Part 2 - The Major Questions Doctrine and the Airing of Judicial Grievances

Seven opinions. One hundred and seventy pages. Six justices agree the tariffs are unlawful — but they can't agree on why, and the reason matters for every future case where the executive claims sweeping power from an old statute. In Part 2, we walk through all seven opinions in Learning Resources v. Trump. Roberts applies the major questions doctrine for the first time against a Republican president — but only three justices sign on. Barrett writes to say the doctrine is just textualism done right. Gorsuch writes a Festivus concurrence going after every other justice on the Court. Kagan says she doesn't need the doctrine at all. Kavanaugh — who helped build the major questions doctrine — abandons it. And Thomas stakes out a solo position on nondelegation that could resurface for years. This is the clearest map yet of where every justice stands on the most contested question in administrative law.