Trade policy hindrance for Trump: Appeal filed by administration after U.S. court blocks tariff action - Customs policy challenged: Court halts Trump administration's policy - government files an appeal
The U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT) has dealt a setback to President Trump's trade policy, declaring his use of emergency powers to impose tariffs on imported goods from almost every country unconstitutional.
The three-judge panel ruled that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) of 1977 does not grant the president unlimited authority to impose tariffs, particularly for addressing trade deficits or broadly redefining emergencies without Congressional approval.
While the decision does not challenge the U.S.'s general ability to increase import tariffs, the judges assert that this power lies solely with Congress. The IEEPA, they explained, only allows the president to impose economic sanctions in extraordinary circumstances to address unusual threats, not as a general tariff authority.
In response, the U.S. government has initiated an appeal against the court's decision, which it claims oversteps the role of unelected judges in handling national emergencies. The White House argued that the president has the power to handle such emergencies as he sees fit, given his promise to prioritize America's interests.
One of Trump's advisors, Stephen Miller, went a step further, labeling the decision a "judicial coup." Meanwhile, the administration has granted a reprieve on threatened tariffs against the European Union until July 9, following a phone call between Trump and EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen.
It is crucial to note that the IEEPA was enacted to empower the president to regulate economic transactions during declared national emergencies related to foreign threats, primarily for sanctions and asset freezes. However, the court's ruling highlights that this act was never intended as a general tariff authority.
The legal challenge remains unresolved, as the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has temporarily stayed the CIT decision, with oral arguments scheduled for June 9, 2025. Regardless, the lower court ruling sets a strong precedent against the legality of using IEEPA for unlimited tariffs, with the broader legal consensus being that such actions infringe upon Congressional power over tariffs.
The panel's ruling in the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT) case marks a significant milestone in employment policy, as it has restrained President Trump's use of emergency powers to impose tariffs, a matter under policy-and-legislation and politics, thereby emphasizing the separation of powers in general-news. The court's decision underscores the Congress's exclusive authority over tariffs, thereby limiting the president's power in this regard.
