Pull to refresh
Logo
Daily Brief
Following
Why Ranks Sign Up
D. John Sauer

D. John Sauer

U.S. Solicitor General

Appears in 7 stories

Notable Quotes

The statute empowers the president to regulate imports during declared national emergencies, and that authority encompasses tariffs. Unwinding this would require refunding trillions and could bankrupt the government.

If courts ruled the tariff powers illegal, it would open the door to ruthless trade retaliation and result in ruinous economic and national security consequences.

“Unelected judges” don’t get to “update the intent of unchanged statutes.” (Quoted in government stay papers, echoing Fourth Circuit debate)

Stories

Trump's emergency tariff gambit

Rule Changes

Argued government's position before Supreme Court

President Trump declared national emergencies over fentanyl trafficking and trade deficits, then used a 1977 law never intended for tariffs to slap duties on nearly every country. Federal courts at every level said he exceeded his authority, yet the tariffs stayed anyway—collecting approximately $150 billion while 301,000 importers awaited word on refunds.

Updated May 19

The $130 billion question: can presidents impose tariffs without Congress?

Rule Changes

Arguing for Trump administration before Supreme Court

A small wine importer and a toy company are forcing the Supreme Court to answer a question: Can the president slap tariffs on the entire world without Congress? Trump used emergency powers law to impose tariffs collecting $130 billion, courts said he overstepped, and now the justices will decide if emergency powers mean what they've always meant—or something new.

Updated May 19

The immigration judges’ gag-rule case hits the Supreme Court—and the justices refuse to freeze it

Rule Changes

Driving the government’s push to keep CSRA channeling strict and stop discovery

Immigration judges say the Justice Department has effectively muzzled them: speak publicly about immigration and you need permission, and what you say can be steered into "agency talking points." The Trump administration's response has been procedural. You don't get federal court—go through the civil-service machinery first.

Updated May 15

Trump’s unitary-executive showdown with independent agencies

Rule Changes

Lead advocate urging the Supreme Court to overturn or narrow Humphrey’s Executor

In 2025, President Donald Trump challenged the 1935 Humphrey's Executor precedent by firing and removing independent agency officials before their terms expired.

Updated May 10

Trump’s birthright citizenship order heads to the Supreme Court

Rule Changes

Arguing in support of EO 14160 before the Supreme Court

On January 20, 2025, the first day of his second term, President Donald Trump signed Executive Order 14160, "Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship." The order denies automatic citizenship to U.S.-born children when the mother is unlawfully present or on a temporary visa and the father is neither a citizen nor a lawful permanent resident. It challenges 125 years of legal consensus (grounded in the 14th Amendment and the Supreme Court's 1898 decision in United States v. Wong Kim Ark) that nearly all children born on U.S. soil are automatically citizens.

Updated May 10

Supreme Court reviews Haiti and Syria TPS terminations

Rule Changes

Argued the cases for the administration on April 29, 2026

Haitians have lived legally in the United States under a federal humanitarian program since the 2010 earthquake. Syrians have used the same program since their civil war began. On April 29, 2026, the Supreme Court spent 80 minutes considering whether the Trump administration can revoke those protections — and whether any court can second-guess the decision.

Updated Apr 29

Supreme Court tests whether marijuana users can own guns

Rule Changes

Argued for the government before the Supreme Court

Since 1968, federal law has barred anyone who uses illegal drugs from owning a firearm. On March 2, 2026, the Supreme Court heard arguments over whether that ban violates the Second Amendment—a question that could reshape gun rights for the roughly 50 million Americans who use marijuana in states where it is legal under state law but still illegal under federal law.

Updated Mar 2