Let's get to MS Now senior legal reporter Lisa Rubin and Paul Butler, a former federal prosecutor and MS Now legal analyst. Lisa, bring us up to speed. What stands out so far in today's arguments.I think what stands out to me is some of what you've already pointed out, right. So that the liberal justices are playing out the consequences of the logic being employed by the administration, which is this isn't just about the FTC. This isn't even just about similarly situated multimemember agencies in the alphab ...

Group 1 - The current political climate is marked by tensions regarding potential government layoffs, with conflicting narratives from the White House and Republican leaders [1][2][3] - There is skepticism about the actual implementation of mass firings, as historical procedures and reforms limit unilateral actions by the government [4][5] - The Supreme Court's upcoming decision on tariffs could significantly impact the current tariff regime, which has been challenged for exceeding presidential authority [8][9] Group 2 - The government's deficit spending is projected to reach $1.7 trillion, approximately 6% of GDP, raising concerns about sustainability [11] - Tariffs are expected to generate $300 billion in revenue by 2026, but their enforceability remains uncertain, complicating budget forecasts [12][13] - The bond market is showing signs of nervousness regarding government fiscal policies, particularly in light of unsustainable deficit levels [13]

Joining us now, Dan Balls, Washington Post chief correspondent. James Sample is Hoffra University law professor and former attorney at the Brennan Center for Justice's Democracy Program. So, James, the White House is claiming a definitive victory here.I guess full steam ahead that gives them sweeping powers. Is that what this says. It doesn't actually say that.As with many of the decisions from the Supreme Court's so-called shadow docket, it says almost nothing in terms of rationale. But the impact of what ...