logo
Federal court blocks Trump's tariffs. Here's what to know

Federal court blocks Trump's tariffs. Here's what to know

WASHINGTON (AP) — A federal court in New York handed President Donald Trump a big setback Wednesday, blocking his audacious plan to impose massive taxes on imports from almost every country in the world.
A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of International Trade ruled that Trump overstepped his authority when he invoked the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act to declare a national emergency and justify the sweeping tariffs.
The tariffs overturned decades of U.S. trade policy, disrupted global commerce, rattled financial markets and raised the risk of higher prices and recession in the United States and around the world.
The U.S. Court of International Trade has jurisdiction over civil cases involving trade. Its decisions can be appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington and ultimately to the Supreme Court, where the legal challenges to Trump' tariffs are widely expected to end up.
Which tariffs did the court block?
The court's decision blocks the tariffs Trump slapped last month on almost all U.S. trading partners and levies he imposed before that on China, Mexico and Canada.
On April 2, Trump imposed so-called reciprocal tariffs of up to 50% on countries with which the United States runs a trade deficit and 10% baseline tariffs on almost everybody else. He later suspended the reciprocal tariffs for 90 days to give countries time to agree to reduce barriers to U.S. exports. But he kept the baseline tariffs in place. Claiming extraordinary power to act without congressional approval, he justified the taxes under IEEPA by declaring the United States' longstanding trade deficits 'a national emergency.'
In February, he'd invoked the law to impose tariffs on Canada, Mexico and China, saying that the illegal flow of immigrants and drugs across the U.S. border amounted to a national emergency and that the three countries needed to do more to stop it.
The U.S. Constitution gives Congress the power to set taxes, including tariffs. But lawmakers have gradually let presidents assume more power over tariffs — and Trump has made the most of it.
The tariffs are being challenged in at least seven lawsuits. In the ruling Wednesday, the trade court combined two of the cases — one brought by five small businesses and another by 12 U.S. states.
The ruling does leave in place other Trump tariffs, including those on foreign steel, aluminum and autos. But those levies were invoked under a different law that required a Commerce Department investigation and could not be imposed at the president's own discretion.
Why did the court rule against the president?
The administration had argued that courts had approved then-President Richard Nixon's emergency use of tariffs in a 1971 economic and financial crisis that arose when the United States suddenly devalued the dollar by ending a policy that linked the U.S. currency to the price of gold. The Nixon administration successfully cited its authority under the 1917 Trading With Enemy Act, which preceded and supplied some of the legal language later used in IEPPA.
The court disagreed, deciding that Trump's sweeping tariffs exceeded his authority to regulate imports under IEEPA. It also said the tariffs did nothing to deal with problems they were supposed to address. In their case, the states noted that America's trade deficits hardly amount of a sudden emergency. The United States has racked them up for 49 straight years in good times and bad.
So where does this leave Trump's trade agenda?
Wendy Cutler, a former U.S. trade official who is now vice president at the Asia Society Policy Institute, says the court's decision 'throws the president's trade policy into turmoil.'
'Partners negotiating hard during the 90-day day tariff pause period may be tempted to hold off making further concessions to the U.S. until there is more legal clarity,' she said.
Monday Mornings
The latest local business news and a lookahead to the coming week.
Likewise, companies will have to reassess the way they run their supply chains, perhaps speeding up shipments to the United States to offset the risk that the tariffs will be reinstated on appeal.
The trade court noted that Trump retains more limited power to impose tariffs to address trade deficits under another statute, the Trade Act of 1974. But that law restricts tariffs to 15% and only for 150 days with countries with which the United States runs big trade deficits.
For now, the trade court's ruling 'destroys the Trump administration's rationale for using federal emergency powers to impose tariffs, which oversteps congressional authority and contravenes any notion of due process,' said Eswar Prasad, professor of trade policy at Cornell University. 'The ruling makes it clear that the broad tariffs imposed unilaterally by Trump represent an overreach of executive power.'
_____
AP Writer Lindsay Whitehurst contributed to this story.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump holding Pennsylvania rally to promote deal for Japan-based Nippon to ‘partner' with U.S. Steel
Trump holding Pennsylvania rally to promote deal for Japan-based Nippon to ‘partner' with U.S. Steel

CTV News

time25 minutes ago

  • CTV News

Trump holding Pennsylvania rally to promote deal for Japan-based Nippon to ‘partner' with U.S. Steel

The United States Steel logo is pictured outside the headquarters building in downtown Pittsburgh, April 26, 2010. (AP Photo/Gene J. Puskar) HARRISBURG, Pa. — U.S. President Donald Trump is holding a rally in Pennsylvania on Friday to celebrate a details-to-come deal for Japan-based Nippon Steel to invest in U.S. Steel, which he says will keep the iconic American steelmaker under U.S.-control. Though Trump initially vowed to block the Japanese steelmaker's bid to buy Pittsburgh-based U.S. Steel, he changed course and announced an agreement last week for what he described as 'partial ownership' by Nippon. It's not clear, though, if the deal his administration helped broker has been finalized or how ownership would be structured. Trump stressed the deal would maintain American control of the storied company, which is seen as both a political symbol and an important matter for the country's supply chain, industries like auto manufacturing and national security. Trump, who has been eager to strike deals and announce new investments in the U.S. since retaking the White House, is also trying to satisfy voters, including blue-collar workers, who elected him as he called to protect U.S. manufacturing. U.S. Steel has not publicly communicated any details of a revamped deal to investors. Nippon Steel issued a statement approving of the proposed 'partnership' but also has not disclosed terms of the arrangement. State and federal lawmakers who have been briefed on the matter describe a deal in which Nippon will buy U.S. Steel and spend billions on U.S. Steel facilities in Pennsylvania, Indiana, Alabama, Arkansas and Minnesota. The company would be overseen by an executive suite and board made up mostly of Americans and protected by the U.S. government's veto power in the form of a 'golden share.' In the absence of clear details or affirmation from the companies involved, the United Steelworkers union, which has long opposed the deal, this week questioned whether the new arrangement makes 'any meaningful change' from the initial proposal. 'Nippon has maintained consistently that it would only invest in U.S. Steel's facilities if it owned the company outright,' the union said in a statement. 'We've seen nothing in the reporting over the past few days suggesting that Nippon has walked back from this position.' The White House did not offer any new details Thursday. U.S. Steel did not respond to messages seeking information. Nippon Steel also declined to comment. No matter the terms, the issue has outsized importance for Trump, who last year repeatedly said he would block the deal and foreign ownership of U.S. Steel, as did former President Joe Biden. Trump promised during the campaign to make the revitalization of American manufacturing a priority of his second term in office. And the fate of U.S. Steel, once the world's largest corporation, could become a political liability in the midterm elections for his Republican Party in the swing state of Pennsylvania and other battleground states dependent on industrial manufacturing. Trump said Sunday he wouldn't approve the deal if U.S. Steel did not remain under U.S. control and said it will keep its headquarters in Pittsburgh. In an interview on Fox News Channel on Wednesday, Pennsylvania Republican Rep. Dan Meuser called the arrangement 'strictly an investment, a strategic partnership where it's American-owned, American run and remains in America.' However, Meuser said he hadn't seen the deal and added that 'it's still being structured.' Pennsylvania Republican Sen. David McCormick came out in favor of the plan, calling it 'great' for the domestic steel industry, Pennsylvania, national security and U.S. Steel's employees. A bipartisan group of senators, joined by then-Senate candidate McCormick, had opposed Nippon Steel's initial proposed purchase of U.S. Steel for US$14.9 billion after it was announced in late 2023. In recent days, Trump and other American officials began touting Nippon Steel's new commitment to invest $14 billion on top of its $14.9 billion bid, including building a new electric arc furnace steel mill somewhere in the U.S. Pennsylvania's other senator, Democrat John Fetterman — who lives across the street from U.S. Steel's Edgar Thomson Steel Works blast furnace — didn't explicitly endorse the new proposal. But he said he had helped jam up Nippon Steel's original bid until 'Nippon coughed up an extra $14B.' The planned 'golden share' for the U.S. amounts to three board members approved by the U.S. government, which will essentially ensure that U.S. Steel can only make decisions that'll be in the best interests of the United States, McCormick said Tuesday on Fox News. Gov. Josh Shapiro, a Democrat who is seen as a potential presidential candidate, had largely refrained from publicly endorsing a deal but said at a news conference this week that he was 'cautiously optimistic' about the arrangement. In an interview published Thursday in the conservative Washington Examiner, Shapiro said: 'The deal has gotten better. The prospects for the future of steelmaking have gotten better.' Chris Kelly, the mayor of West Mifflin, Pennsylvania, where U.S. Steel's Irvin finishing plant is located, said he was 'ecstatic' about the deal, though he acknowledged some details were unknown. He said it will save thousands of jobs for his community. 'It's like a reprieve from taking steel out of Pittsburgh,' he said. ___ Michelle L. Price And Marc Levy, The Associated Press Price reported from Washington. AP writer Yuri Kageyama in Tokyo contributed to this report.

Colby Cosh: It turns out Trump's tariffs were illegal after all
Colby Cosh: It turns out Trump's tariffs were illegal after all

National Post

time35 minutes ago

  • National Post

Colby Cosh: It turns out Trump's tariffs were illegal after all

The U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT) issued a decision yesterday that annuls various salvos of surprise economic tariffs, including ones on Canada, that have been enacted by President Donald Trump since his inauguration in January. I won't lie to you: I had the same initial reaction to this consequential news that you probably did, which was 'Hooray!' and then 'Huh, there's a U.S. Court of International Trade?' Article content Article content Article content This court is surely unfamiliar even to most Americans, no doubt because much of its work involves settling issues like 'Do hockey pants count as 'garments' or 'sports equipment' under customs law?' Nevertheless, the CIT does have exclusive jurisdiction over civil actions involving U.S. trade law. It's just that no president has ever before rewritten the tariff schedule of the republic in the half-mad fashion of a child taking crayons to a fresh-painted wall. Article content Article content The American Constitution, from day one, has unambiguously assigned the right to set international tariffs to Congress. Congress is allowed to delegate its powers to the president and his agents for limited or temporary purposes, but it can't abandon those powers to him altogether. Defining this legal frontier is what the CIT was asked to do, and their demarcation of it will now swim upward through higher appellate courts (its decision has been put on hold in the meantime). Article content The lawsuit was actually two parallel suits raising overlapping objections to the tariffs. One was brought forward by 12 U.S. states, and the other was filed by a group of tariff-exposed American businesses, including manufacturers of bikes, electronics kits and fishing equipment. The latter set of plaintiffs was roped together by the usual posse of heroic libertarians and legal originalists, including George Mason University law prof Ilya Somin. Article content About 24 hours after Trump originally announced the 'Liberation Day' worldwide tariffs, Somin quickly blogged about how insanely unconstitutional the whole idea was, and concluded his article essentially by saying 'I'm darn well gonna do something about this nonsense.' I don't mean to suggest he deserves primary credit; I only intend to call attention, once again, to U.S. libertarians being the best friends Canada doesn't know it has. Article content

European benchmarks rise while Asian shares finished lower amid uncertainty over Trump's tariffs
European benchmarks rise while Asian shares finished lower amid uncertainty over Trump's tariffs

CTV News

timean hour ago

  • CTV News

European benchmarks rise while Asian shares finished lower amid uncertainty over Trump's tariffs

TOKYO — European shares rose while Asian benchmarks finished mostly lower Friday as uncertainty grew about what will happen next after a U.S. court blocked many of President Donald Trump's sweeping tariffs. France's CAC 40 rose 0.2 per cent in early trading to 7,796.14, while Germany's DAX jumped 0.6 per cent to 24,122.42. Britain's FTSE 100 added 0.6 per cent to 8,771.71. U.S. shares were set to drift lower with Dow futures down 0.1 per cent at 42,217.00. S&P 500 futures declined 0.1 per cent to 5,914.75. Japan's benchmark Nikkei 225 lost 1.2 per cent to finish at 37,965.10. Government data showed Tokyo core inflation, excluding fresh food, rising to a higher-than-expected 3.6 per cent in May. Some analysts say that makes it more likely the Bank of Japan will raise interest rates. Australia's S&P/ASX 200 rose 0.3 per cent to 8,434.70. South Korea's Kospi declined 0.8 per cent to 2,697.67, ahead of a presidential election set for next week. Hong Kong's Hang Seng slipped 1.2 per cent to 23,289.77, while the Shanghai Composite shed 0.5 per cent to 3,347.49. Earlier this week, the U.S. Court of International Trade said that the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act that Trump cited for ordering massive increases in taxes on imports from around the world does not authorize the use of tariffs. The ruling at first raised hopes in financial markets that a hamstrung Trump would not be able to drive the economy into a recession with his tariffs, which had threatened to grind down on global trade and raise prices for consumers already sick of high inflation. But the tariffs remain in place for now while the White House appeals the ruling, and the ultimate outcome is still uncertain. The court's ruling also affects only some of Trump's tariffs, not those on foreign steel, aluminum and autos, which were invoked under a different law. The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Thursday allowed the president to temporarily continue collecting the tariffs under the emergency powers law while he appeals the trade court's decision. Un energy trading, benchmark U.S. crude rose 24 cents to US$61.18 a barrel. Brent crude, the international standard, edged up 23 cents to $64.38 a barrel. In currency trading, the U.S. dollar declined to 143.96 Japanese yen from 144.12 yen. The euro cost $1.1342, down from $1.1367. Yuri Kageyama, The Associated Press

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store