language and your interpretation of the term the briefs so let me go directly if i may and you can come back if you want to see more about the statute but i want to go directly to a question that is i'm sure what your position is and that is on three thousand and six a what are the president's options as you see them made the president say very well i we all agreed the president  him fine with the recommendations and i hereby issue the requisite declaration and those recommendations go into effect of the president say i'm fine with several of the and if you look at the it's not binary modification by modification i mean that seems trains to me because then it would seem that you're suggesting the commission if they even the president in series rather than on a single document he could pick and choose multiple sections are you suggesting that three thousand and six deprives the president of the authority to say based on your recommendation with regard to this section i will in fact make the modification but i will not make check their bench memos and say yep this looks right to me and it doesn't say anything about my authority or lack of a party to disagree with my law clerks i don't see the fact that implicitly the presidents have limitation on the president before he can proclaim modification the president must determine the modifications are in conformity with us obligations and don't run counter if you increase the tariff rates to a thousand bucks i think would be pretty hard to justify that he determines which there was a question as to whether their head even then the required determination by the commission and this is a case in which there's no doubt that there's been a mentoring donation to your challenges to this case touches like trust issues as well because we have congress who has a story will go over to the prosecution to invent statutes entire school delegate that authority or three in their executive branch and that's what's happened to their reviewed whether there was an a p a cause of action for the reasons that trump rightly how there simply is not a cause of action now if i could touch upon another issue raised with counsel even taking the most restrictive view of the president's  what is crucial is the fact that the president not just takes the final action that effects the military installations and that's precisely what we have here this case is indistinguishable from the specter and any material way which is what the  what do you think the scope of the president's authority is under five thousand and six a thank the president could say thank you very much for your recommendation and when they're poor into that particular vessel that vessel is delivered to the door of the court of international trade it has no substantive effect it creates no right and then the right to appear before the clear misconstruction of the governing statute a significant procedural violation and this is the key language here we're actually outside delegated that's why patmos case we have problems delegating authority says you can so we're going to love if you allow the trial court decision to stand and you will also think it's inexcusable irresponsible to work its way into the terror schedule and you're going to allow the executive branch the way of overturning this court's decision