Trump threatens to veto Senate resolution blocking tariffs

Super fun, watching our president reject every possible off-ramp with hostility only to later freak out and panic when there are no more off-ramps left. Fucking moron

He's too much of a narcissist to take the off-ramps provided by other people. He has to come up with one himself so he can claim he's the expert dealmaker who saved us all.
- That's not an off-ramp, it's a cliff.
did you know he often shits himselfs when he flys into a rage, the producers on his show later revealed how often he did it,

If he had 3 brain cells to rub together, he'd take this offramp and say "The tariffs were beautiful, and working perfectly, but the China-loving RINOs and Democrats killed them before we brought manufacturing back to our shores and eliminated income taxes."

And what's funny is MAGA would lap it up. We've always been at war with Eastasia.
You already pointed out why he won't do it.

If he had 3 brain cells to rub together,

Well, technically he can. Then Congress can just override it with two-thirds majority. Grow those spines — you got this.

So, if this is initially approved with a 2/3 majority can he still veto it and then they have to vote again? Or is there such a thing as a “veto-proof” initial passing?
- They always need to vote again, sometimes a president veto will cause a bill to lose support and reps have an opportunity to change their vote.
  
  Sometimes though presidents won't veto if it passes initially at that threshold, depending how embedded they are in their perspective.

"I am the senate."

Not yet... hey, where did the Jedi run off to?
- Busy adjusting their stock portfolios.

That's a good way to turn the Senate against you

The Senate will decide your fate
- I AM THE SENATE - Trump, 2025

Here is something I’ve been curious about. Congress has undisputed constitutional control of tariffs. A previous Congress enacted a law to delegate some of that authority to the President.

So now.. how can the President (or anyone) just say, “fuck you, you can’t have your constitutional power back?” Why can’t Congress just fall back to their constitutional authority and render their predecessors’ delegation invalid?

President can veto any bill. It will go back to Congress and needs (I think) 2/3 to override the veto
- Correct. Requires ⅔ support in both chambers after a veto.
- In more simple terms, Trump can't prevent congress from passing laws about tariffs.
  
  All he can do is make it more difficult, by requiring a higher percentage of the legislature vote on it.
Congress does not have the constitutional authority to declare a prior Congresses laws invalid. For a bunch of internal stuff like the fillubuster rules, or remote voting, the current Congress can do whatever it wants without presidential review. However once a law is passed through the constitutional process, the constitution does not have a separate process for repealing it. This means that Congress would need to go through the same constitutional process to repeal it, which includes the possibility of a presidential veto.

Having said that, the Supreme Court does have the constitutional authority to declare a law invalid[0], and the President has no veto authority over that. Further, the current Supreme Court has invented out of nothingness two bedrock pillars of constitutional analysis:

The Major Questions Doctrine, which states that questions of major political or economic significance may not be delegated by Congress to the executive branch.

The Non-Delegation Doctrine, which states that Congress may not delegate it's lawmaking authority to other entities.

Since the Supreme Court is an unbiased arbiter of the law, I'm confident that they will apply these principles consistently and determine that Congress's initial delegation if tarrif authority was unconditional. /s

[0] This is not actually explicit in the Constitution. But has been how it is interpreted since Marbury v Madison in 1803.

If trump vetos (which we all know he would) can't the senate overturn his veto? Though I think a vote to overturn would require 2/3 majority

Yeah, threatening to veto just means it would eventually need more votes (but I doubt he'd veto it).
can I drive you

Supreme Court: He's got you there, come again next time you want to try and claw back congressional powers from a fascist

great. another way you put the tariff debacle on yourself.