Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch, nominated by President Donald Trump, questioned Solicitor General D. John Sauer on Wednesday about the limits of presidential authority during arguments on the legality of Trump's tariff policies.

Mediaite reported that Sauer urged the justices to overturn lower court decisions that blocked Trump's use of emergency powers under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to impose tariffs on foreign countries.

"General, just a few questions following up on the major questions, discussions you've had," Gorsuch asked Sauer. "You say that we shouldn't be so concerned in the area of foreign affairs because of the president's inherent powers.

"That's the gist of it, as I understand it, why we should disregard both major questions and non-delegation. So could Congress delegate to the president the power to regulate commerce with foreign nations as he sees fit? To lay and collect duties as he sees fit?"

Sauer's reply, "We don't assert that here. That would be a much harder case now. In 1790 … ," but Gorsuch interjected, "Isn't that the logic of your view, though?"

Sauer responded, "I don't think so, because we're dealing with a statute that was a carefully crafted compromise. It does have all the limitations that I just talked about."

Gorsuch pressed further.

"You're saying we shouldn't look, we shouldn't be concerned with — I want you to explain to me how you draw the line because you say we shouldn't be concerned because this is foreign affairs and the president has inherent authority and so delegation is off the books, more or less.

"If that's true, what would prohibit Congress from just abdicating all responsibility to regulate foreign commerce, or for that matter, declare war to the president?"

Sauer replied, "We don't contend that he could do that."

"Why not?" Gorsuch continued. "Well, because we're dealing with a statute again that has a whole — I'm not asking about the statute, General, I'm asking about your theory of the Constitution and why the major questions or non-delegation, what bite it would have in that case."

Sauer said, "I would say by then you would move from the area where there's enormous deference to the President — actually both the political branches — where here there's inherent authority and pile on top of that, there's a broad delegation."

Gorsuch responded, "You're saying there's inherent authority in foreign affairs, all foreign affairs.

"So regulate commerce, duties, and tariffs, and war. It's inherent authority all the way down, you say. Fine. Congress decides tomorrow, well, we're tired of this legislating business. We're just going to hand it all off to the president. What would stop Congress from doing that?"

Sauer concluded, "That would be different than a situation where there are metes and bounds, so to speak. It would be a wholesale abdication."

Gorsuch replied, "I'm delighted to hear that. All right, and I want to return to it."

The case reached the Supreme Court after lower courts found that President Trump's use of emergency powers to impose tariffs may have exceeded statutory limits.

Justices are considering, among other things, whether the International Emergency Economic Powers Act grants a president authority to set trade restrictions without explicit congressional consent.