logo
Analysis: A telling judicial rebuke of Trump's tariffs – from another Trump appointee

Analysis: A telling judicial rebuke of Trump's tariffs – from another Trump appointee

CNN29-05-2025

The biggest story of President Donald Trump's second term thus far is his going to great lengths to expand his own power – and daring Congress, the courts and anyone else to stand in his way. Those who do so are labeled usurpers.
But the sheer brazenness of Trump's power grabs has steadily come into focus via a stream of major judicial rebukes.
And it's not just the language of the decisions that looms large; it's also the sources. Even several judges appointed by Trump himself have now ruled he and his administration have gone too far, too fast. It's a list that keeps growing.
That makes it increasingly difficult for the administration to continue arguing that the adverse rulings are truly about the judiciary's overreach – as opposed to its own.
A case in point is Wednesday's ruling by the US Court of International Trade striking down many of Trump's most significant tariffs. The ruling is one of the most significant yet, halting a centerpiece of both Trump's economic and foreign policy agendas.
The unanimous three-judge panel ruled that Trump exceeded his authority by effectively treating Congress's granting of certain tariff authorities as carte blanche to do whatever he wanted. (The administration quickly appealed, and the issue could be headed to the Supreme Court.)
And some of the language is pretty stark.
The case deals with Trump's use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) of 1977. The act allows the president to levy tariffs 'to deal with any unusual and extraordinary threat' emanating from outside the country 'to the national security, foreign policy, or economy of the United States.'
Trump has declared national emergencies related to drugs and crime, as well as persistent trade deficits with other countries. He has sought to use those declarations to justify tariffs on Canada, China and Mexico, as well as the global tariffs he announced on what the administration deemed 'Liberation Day' last month.
But the three-judge panel said the IEEPA 'does not authorize anything as unbounded as the Worldwide and Retaliatory Tariffs.' It said that 'such a reading would create an unconstitutional delegation of power.'
The panel said tariffs were not a valid method to 'deal with' the threats Trump cited, because creating leverage over other countries doesn't directly address drug trafficking.
(In a rather dryly worded footnote, the judges noted that the tariffs 'do not change the effective rate of duty' – i.e. 0 percent – 'for smuggled drugs themselves.')
And it rejected the administration's argument that the courts couldn't question Trump's emergency declarations, saying a provision in the law that limits a president's tariff authority 'is not a symbolic festoon.'
The White House responded to the major setback with familiar talking points. They took aim at the actions of 'unelected judges,' asserting they shouldn't be able to question Trump's foreign policy actions. Top White House adviser Stephen Miller added on X: 'The judicial coup is out of control.'
But yet again, the ruling included none other than a judge appointed by Trump.
Trump first nominated Timothy Reif to the federal trade court back in 2018. Reif joined in the unanimous opinion – along with judges appointed by former Presidents Barack Obama and Ronald Reagan.
There is some nuance here. Trump allies note that Reif was a Democrat who served in the Obama administration. (Trump had to nominate a Democrat, given the court is capped at five appointees from one party or another.)
But Reif was also a political appointee in the Trump administration, serving as a senior advisor under then-U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer before his nomination to the federal trade court. Indeed, his decision to serve in the Trump administration reportedly caught allies off guard, as the Daily Beast reported in 2017.
The Wall Street Journal described Reif as 'a Democrat with a reputation as a protectionist,' which would suggest he could be sympathetic to Trump's trade policies and tariffs. (One of Trump's top trade advisers, Peter Navarro, is also a protectionist former Democrat.)
In sum, this is a vote that the administration would certainly prefer not to lose – especially given his vote wasn't even necessary for the court's majority.
But this is becoming a familiar tale. Repeatedly and increasingly, Trump-appointed judges have said the administration is grabbing too much power.
Earlier this week, a Trump-appointed US district judge in New York, Lewis J. Liman, blocked the administration's attempts to thwart New York City's congestion pricing program. He said the administration's policy 'undermines the authority of a sovereign state to authorize policy decided on by its elected representatives.'
Last month, another Trump-appointed US district judge, Stephanie A. Gallagher, ruled the administration had wrongly deported a man and had to 'facilitate' his return.
Another, Trevor McFadden, ruled the administration had unconstitutionally retaliated against the Associated Press by barring it from White House events, calling US officials' actions 'brazen.'
Yet another, Fernando Rodriguez Jr., in recent weeks became the first district judge to fully reject the administration's use of the Alien Enemies Act for rapid deportations.
Another, Stephanie Haines, said the administration could use the Alien Enemies Act. But she sharply undercut its utility by saying the administration hadn't provided migrants enough time to challenge their deportations. The judge required they give 21 days.
And then there is, of course, the Supreme Court. Each of Trump's three appointees to that court – Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett – has declined to dissent when the court sought to check Trump's deportation powers. It's actually been the other conservative justices, the ones appointed by Republican presidents before Trump, who have been more amenable to the administration's actions. (The Supreme Court sometimes issues rapid orders that don't denote who voted which way, but justices can note when they dissent.)
It's somewhat fraught to focus too intensely on which president nominated a judge who issues a major decision. Federal judges, with the insulation of a lifetime appointment, are supposed to interpret the law without regard to politics.
But it says a lot that the people Trump has seen fit to appoint to such important roles have increasingly thwarted some of his boldest moves. That speaks to just how far he's pushed the envelope in challenging the limits of his power.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

A new day of immigration protests is starting in Los Angeles
A new day of immigration protests is starting in Los Angeles

The Verge

time20 minutes ago

  • The Verge

A new day of immigration protests is starting in Los Angeles

Angelenos are demanding the release of people detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), planning to gather in downtown Los Angeles for another day of protests following immigration raids throughout the region — but this time, against the backdrop of a federal National Guard deployment. Immigrant rights groups and unions plan to gather for one of the major actions anticipated in LA today, coinciding with the scheduled arraignment of the prominent labor leader David Huerta who was arrested on Friday. Beyond Huerta, folks are turning out to support coworkers and loved ones. 'These raids are cruel, disruptive, and designed to terrorize immigrant communities. They tear families apart,' the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) said in a statement the day Huerta was arrested. Huerta is President of SEIU California and was detained while 'conducting legal observation of ICE activity in his community,' according to AFL-CIO union leaders. SEIU says Huerta was 'beaten and dragged away.' ICE didn't immediately respond to a request for response from The Verge. At least 118 people were arrested in ICE operations last week, according to a Department of Homeland Security press release on Saturday. Protests have emerged across Los Angeles to stop ICE from detaining community members as part of the Trump administration's mass deportation campaign. President Trump called protesters 'troublemakers and insurrectionists' on Truth Social. On Saturday night, he ordered the National Guard to deploy and crack down on protests against the wishes of Governor Gavin Newsom — marking the first time a president has ordered troops without a governor's assent since 1965. Mayor Karen Bass called the move 'a chaotic escalation' and Newsom said it was 'purposefully inflammatory and [would] only escalate tensions.' Over the weekend, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth also threatened to deploy Marines. Demonstrations across the city on Saturday 'remained peaceful,' the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) said in a statement that night. But by late Sunday, hours after National Guard troops arrived, clashes escalated as more authorities and protesters gathered. The LAPD authorized the use of 'less lethal munitions' and an Australian reporter was caught on camera being shot by a rubber bullet. A British photojournalist said he was undergoing emergency surgery after being hit by what he believes was a non-lethal round. Waymo suspended its ride services after some of its tagged-up vehicles were set ablaze. LAPD spokesperson Drake Madison says that 42 people have been arrested so far, as of a Monday morning email to The Verge. An interfaith prayer vigil planned for Sunday night was canceled by organizers 'out of an abundance of caution.' A declaration of 'unlawful assembly' was in place overnight for downtown Los Angeles. But 'the tactical alert has been lifted,' Madison said in another email Monday morning.

4 Timing Secrets That Fueled Billion-Dollar Venture Growth
4 Timing Secrets That Fueled Billion-Dollar Venture Growth

Forbes

time20 minutes ago

  • Forbes

4 Timing Secrets That Fueled Billion-Dollar Venture Growth

Time to Takeoff: Get It Right! getty Most unicorn founders weren't first — they just mastered timing. These timing secrets fueled unicorn growth by helping entrepreneurs spot the right emerging trends early, act before takeoff, and use that narrow window to build the right strategy and skills to lead the industry. That's how Sam Walton beat Kmart, Jeff Bezos won over Borders, and Mark Zuckerberg overtook MySpace — without needing early venture capital and often beating those who had more capital. Here are 4 key timing secrets of Founder-CEOs who achieved rapid growth and market dominance. Just like ChatGPT, DeepSeek, and Mistral, unicorns are best launched when the industry is just emerging. The key to building a unicorn is entering the right emerging trend — for you — at the right time. This is after the industry starts and before it takes off and this time period has ranged from about 3 to 11 years ( • After the start because major trends are started by external factors – not by an entrepreneur. These factors can include disruptive technologies, new laws, and economic changes. • Before takeoff because it is difficult even for existing giants to catch up, as is demonstrated by Sears, Wards and the countless other giants crushed by upstart billion-dollar entrepreneurs. Nearly every billion-dollar entrepreneur took advantage of an emerging trend, including: • Big-box stores: Sam Walton (Walmart) and Dick Schulze (Best Buy). • Personal computers: Bill Gates (Microsoft) and Michael Dell (Dell) • Linking PCs: Leonard Bosack and Sandy Lerner (Cisco) • Internet 1.0: Jeff Bezos ( and Page and Brin (Google) • Internet 2.0: Mark Zuckerberg (Facebook/ Meta) • Internet 3.0: Travis Kalanick (Uber) and Brian Chesky (Airbnb). What can you do? Emerging trends often take 3 to 11 years to take off – but your window to enter is at the beginning, not after takeoff. The earlier you start, the more time you'll have to refine your strategy and build dominance. When you enter the trend is important. The winners are rarely first movers. They're usually first dominators. One of the key reasons why only about 11% of first movers led their industry ( is that first-to-market or even a product-market fit is often not enough. The winners are those who dominate, not those who rush. The ultimate winners are usually smart followers. In artificial intelligence, IBM was the first, but many other companies, including ChatGPT, seem to be leading. Examples of smart followers included Sam Walton in the big-box trend, Bill Gates in the personal computer trend, Steve Jobs in the iPod and iPhone trends, and Brian Chesky in the online trend ( Alex Karp noted that some in Europe are waiting for the right moment to get in on AI, and that they will rue their delay. His point – get in now or miss a major emerging trend. What can you do? If you are the first mover, keep pivoting to find the right strategy (see #3). If you are the smart mover, find the neglected segment that can be targeted by the emerging trend. Finding the right strategy is key because each emerging trend is different. Product-market fit gets you started. But domination requires the right combination of product, market, strategic group, sales driver, and unicorn-launch skills: • Walmart: Found his niche in rural locations by pivoting from small stores. • Gates: Found his edge with a strategic alliance with IBM by pivoting from writing programs. • Dell: Dominated by selling direct-to-consumer. • Bezos: Launched with books to dominate. • Chesky: Focused on helping landlords find guests and pivoted from guests. What can you do? Most unicorns didn't guess their way into dominance — they learned, pivoted, and refined until they found the dominant strategy. You may have to do so also. So be flexible to pivot and test to find the right strategy – this takes time. Unicorn-entrepreneurs rely on skills to grow from idea to unicorn. They do not rely on VCs or their hired CEOs. They learn both technical skills (or partner with someone who has them) and unicorn-launch skills. Gaston Taratuta didn't jump in blindly – he learned the skills to enter the emerging Internet trend by joining Universo Online in Brazil and then scaled Aleph into a billion-dollar company ( What can you do? Identify the unicorn-launch skills you lack. Then learn, test, and practice them before the trend takes off. ( MY TAKE: Timing isn't about being first. It's about being ready — with the right skills, strategy, and edge — before the trend takes off. Jump in when the trend begins, then use the runway to master your skills, evaluate your strategy, and position yourself to dominate when the trend takes off. Or better yet – be the leader who makes the trend take off. Learn how the top 125 billion-dollar entrepreneurs did it — often without VC. Read my other blogs on Forbes.

Trump admin live updates: President to announce 'Trump savings accounts' for parents, guardians

time21 minutes ago

Trump admin live updates: President to announce 'Trump savings accounts' for parents, guardians

The accounts are part of Trump's megabill. 1:40 As the Trump administration continues to ramp up its focus on Los Angeles and threatens to send troops to the city amid anti-ICE protests, the fallout from President Donald Trump and Elon Musk's feud continues. This comes as Republicans in Congress continue to work on agreeing on language for Trump's "Big Beautiful Bill." Meanwhile, U.S.-China trade talks in London this week are expected to take up a series of fresh disputes that have buffeted relations, threatening a fragile truce over tariffs. President Donald Trump will host a roundtable Monday to formally announce the provision in his massive funding bill called the "Trump savings accounts," which will allow parents and guardians to invest funds in the financial markets on behalf of children, a White House official confirms to ABC News. The savings account would be applicable to children born between January 1, 2025, and January 1, 2029. The government would deposit $1,000 into a tax-deferred, low-cost index fund account that will track the overall stock market for each newborn. Additional contributions can go up to $5,000 annually. When the children reach adulthood, they are able to take out the money to cover things like college or a down payment on a home. "The passage of the One Big Beautiful Bill will literally change the lives of working, middle class families across America by delivering the largest tax cuts in history, increasing the child tax credit, AND by creating this incredible new "Trump Account" program, which will put the lives of young Americans on the right financial path," White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a statement to ABC News. Multiple CEO's from companies, such as Dell Technologies, will appear with Trump to announce billions of dollars in collective investments into "Trump Accounts" for the children of their employees, according to the official. The event comes as the White House works to highlight Trump's so-called "One, Big, Beautiful Bill," as the Senate works through attempting to pass the budget bill and amid explosive criticism from Elon Musk last week. --ABC News' Lalee Ibssa

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