Federal court ruling strikes down many tariffs imposed by Trump
A federal court has dealt a blow to Donald Trump’s sweeping use of tariffs in a ruling that drew an immediate appeal.
The U.S. Court of International Trade ruled May 28 that many of the tariffs imposed by Trump exceeded the president’s authority under the International Economic Emergency Powers Act.
Trump had cited the IEEPA in imposing the tariffs, which have created stock market chaos and uncertainty among consumers and in industries including agriculture.
The unanimous ruling (.pdf) of the three-judge panel struck down a 10% tariff imposed April 2 on all U.S. trading partners to address trade deficits, as well as Trump’s paused “reciprocal” tariffs of between 20% and 50% on around 60 countries, now scheduled to take effect on July 9 if trade deals aren’t reached.
A day later, a federal court allowed the tariffs to temporarily stay in place. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, which oversees the International Trade Court, granted the Trump administration’s request for a temporary administrative stay, according to Yahoo Finance and The New York Times.
The administration must submit legal arguments by June 9, after which the court will determine the next steps.
The May 28 judgment also struck down 25% duties on Canadian and Mexican products and a 20% tariff on Chinese goods in response to a purported national drug trafficking emergency.
“Because of the Constitution’s express allocation of the tariff power to Congress … we do not read IEEPA to delegate an unbounded tariff authority to the President,” the court wrote.
The White House rejected the court’s authority in the ruling, which the Justice Department quickly appealed.
“It is not for unelected judges to decide how to properly address a national emergency,” White House spokesman Kush Desai said in a statement. “President Trump pledged to put America First, and the Administration is committed to using every lever of executive power to address this crisis and restore American Greatness.”
The ruling means that the government may have to pay back duties it has already collected.
“Anybody that has had to pay tariffs so far will be able to get them refunded,” Ilya Somin, a professor of law at George Mason University, who helped argue a case against the tariffs brought by several small businesses, told Politico.
The court’s ruling does not affect other tariffs, such as those imposed under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, which allows the president to levy new duties because of national security concerns. Trump used that provision in March to increase existing steel and aluminum tariffs and institute a 25% duty on foreign auto imports.
“Today’s court order is a victory not just for Oregon, but for working families, small businesses, and everyday Americans. President Trump’s sweeping tariffs were unlawful, reckless and economically devastating,” Oregon’ Attorney General Dan Rayfield, one of 12 state attorneys general who filed lawsuits challenging the tariffs, told Politico. “We brought this case because the Constitution doesn’t give any president unchecked authority to upend the economy. This ruling reaffirms that our laws matter, and that trade decisions can’t be made on the president’s whim.”
