Via the AP: Federal court blocks Trump from imposing sweeping tariffs under emergency powers law.
A federal court on Wednesday blocked President Donald Trump from imposing sweeping tariffs on imports under an emergency-powers law, swiftly throwing into doubt Trump’s signature set of economic policies that have rattled global financial markets, frustrated trade partners and raised broader fears about inflation intensifying and the economy slumping.
The ruling from a three-judge panel at the New York-based U.S. Court of International Trade came after several lawsuits arguing Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariffs exceeded his authority and left the country’s trade policy dependent on his whims.
This unanimous ruling, issued by a three-judge panel including a Trump appointee, a Reagan appointee, and an Obama appointee, severely curtails Trump’s ability to issue whatever tariff at whatever level on whomever and whatever he wishes.
He may still have some more limited options.
Trump might still be able to temporarily launch import taxes of 15% for 150 days on nations with which the U.S. runs a substantial trade deficit. The ruling notes that a president has this authority under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974.
[…]
The ruling left in place any tariffs that Trump put in place using his Section 232 powers from the Trade Expansion Act of 1962. He put a 25% tax on most imported autos and parts, as well as on all foreign-made steel and aluminum. Those tariffs depend on a Commerce Department investigation that reveals national security risks from imported products.
I must confess, this amused me:
He is facing at least seven lawsuits challenging the levies. The plaintiffs argued that the emergency powers law does not authorize the use of tariffs, and even if it did, the trade deficit is not an emergency because the U.S. has run a trade deficit with the rest of the world for 49 consecutive years.
Indeed.
Ilya Somin, who helped file the suit, writes about it all at Reason: We Won Our Tariff Case!
In that write-up, he notes that the court ruled that the constitutional strictures creating separation of powers simply do not allow such sweeping and permanent delegation of authority of the type Trump asserted under his “Liberation Day” proclamations.
Here is Paul Krugman’s initial reaction: Is There a Dignified Legal Way, Preferably in Latin, to Say “Holy Shit”?
Here’s his longer assessment: The Trade Emperor Has Always Been Stark Naked. Rather than try to excerpt, I will simply recommend it as worthwhile reading.
Of course, this will all result in even more rhetorical attacks on the courts
SCOTUS will have to weigh in, so this isn’t over yet, but a good ruling nonetheless.
