A Federal Court Just Blocked Trump's Tariffs
The U.S. Court of International Trade on Wednesday evening struck down President Donald Trump's use of emergency executive powers to impose tariffs on nearly all imports.
The ruling includes an injunction that immediately blocks the collection of tariffs Trump imposed under the International Economic Emergency Powers Act (IEEPA) of 1977. The Trump administration had used that law as the legal basis for tariffs imposed in February on imports from Canada, China, and Mexico, then used it again as the basis for the so-called "Liberation Day" tariffs announced on April 2 and applying to nearly all American imports.
The court ruled that Trump had overstepped the authority granted by IEEPA, which had never previously been invoked to impose tariffs.
"The court holds…that IEEPA does not authorize any of the Worldwide, Retaliatory, or Trafficking Tariff Orders," a three-judge panel on the court wrote. Those orders, the judges wrote, "exceed any authority granted to the President by IEEPA to regulate importation by means of tariffs."
"The challenged Tariff Orders will be vacated and their operation permanently enjoined," they concluded.
The ruling combines two cases that challenged the legal authority of Trump's tariffs. One of those cases was brought by the Liberty Justice Center on behalf of several American businesses that depend on imported goods. (Reason interviewed one of the plaintiffs in the case shortly after it was filed in April.) The other was filed by several state attorneys general.
The court's ruling is a sweeping one that covers all imports. "There is no question here of narrowly tailored relief," the three judges wrote in their ruling. "If the challenged Tariff Orders are unlawful as to Plaintiffs they are unlawful as to all."
The ruling is a welcome blow to the Trump administration's freewheeling use of IEEPA in ways that seemingly ignored the plain text of the law—which authorizes executive action only in response to "unusual and extraordinary" threats to the United States. Ordinary imports to the country do not meet that standard, the plaintiffs argued in the case. Additionally, the plaintiffs argued that Congress could not constitutionally delegate such sweeping tariff powers to the executive branch.
In its ruling on Wednesday, the Court of International Trade seemed to agree on both points.
"We do not read IEEPA to delegate an unbounded tariff authority to the President," the judges wrote. "We instead read IEEPA's provisions to impose meaningful limits on any such authority it confers."
The Trump administration will almost certainly appeal the ruling and request a stay of the injunction on the tariffs. It's impossible to say how those things will turn out.
For now, however, this is a huge win for free trade—and, perhaps more importantly, Wednesday's ruling is a win for the rule of law and the separation of powers.
The post A Federal Court Just Blocked Trump's Tariffs appeared first on Reason.com.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
12 minutes ago
Asian shares mostly decline as uncertainty grows about what's next with Trump's tariffs
TOKYO -- Asian shares were 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. Japan's benchmark Nikkei 225 lost 1.1% in afternoon trading to 38,022.62. Government data showed Tokyo core inflation, excluding fresh food, rising to a higher-than-expected 3.6% 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% to 8,436.30. South Korea's Kospi declined 0.9% to 2,696.40, ahead of a presidential election set for next week. Hong Kong's Hang Seng slipped 1.4% to 23,234.42, while the Shanghai Composite shed 0.3% to 3,354.83. On Wall Street, the S&P 500 rose 0.4% on Thursday, the Dow Jones Industrial Average added 117 points, or 0.3%, and the Nasdaq composite rose 0.4%. It's a downshift after stocks initially leaped nearly 2% in Tokyo and Seoul, where markets had the first chance to react to the ruling late Wednesday by the U.S. Court of International Trade. The court 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. Trump 'is still able to impose significant and wide-ranging tariffs over the longer-term through other means,' according to Ulrike Hoffmann-Burchardi, chief investment officer of global equities at UBS Global Wealth Management. On Wall Street, tech stocks led the way after Nvidia once again topped analysts' expectations for profit and revenue in the latest quarter. The chip company has grown into one of the U.S. market's largest and most influential stocks because of the frenzy around artificial-intelligence technology, and its 3.2% rise was the strongest force by far lifting the S&P 500. All told, the S&P 500 rose 23.62 points to 5,912.17. The Dow Jones Industrial Average added 117.03 to 42,215.73, and the Nasdaq composite gained 74.93 to 19,175.87. In the bond market, Treasury yields eased following mixed economic reports. One said the U.S. economy likely shrunk by less in the first three months of the year than earlier estimated. Another said slightly more U.S. workers applied for unemployment benefits last week than economists expected. The yield on the 10-year Treasury fell to 4.43% from 4.47% late Wednesday. In energy trading, benchmark U.S. crude dropped 18 cents to $60.76 a barrel. Brent crude, the international standard, fell 20 cents to $63.95 a barrel. In currency trading, the U.S. dollar declined to 143.90 Japanese yen from 144.12 yen. The euro cost $1.1347, down from $1.1367.
Time Business News
17 minutes ago
- Time Business News
The Dual Oversight of Power: Executive and Legislative Control in U.S. Administration
By Jean Richard Franck, M.A., Doctoral Student in Public Administration In the landscape of American democracy, power does not reside in a single person, branch, or institution. It is checked, balanced, and most importantly—shared. Nowhere is this more evident than in the oversight of administrative agencies, where both the executive and legislative branches exercise authority. This shared control is not a tug-of-war. It is a dynamic process—a choreography of law, leadership, and legitimacy. Many people imagine that the President alone controls the agencies of government. After all, the President appoints agency heads, signs executive orders, and shapes the national agenda. But in truth, Congress is the architect. It creates these agencies, defines their scope, and holds the purse strings. One branch steers the ship, the other builds and funds it. Together, they guide the course of governance. Consider the President's tools: executive orders, budget proposals, memoranda, and the authority to nominate (and in some cases, remove) key officials. These powers are formidable. They allow the President to implement change without waiting for legislation. Through the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), the President can even delay or revise agency regulations that don't align with White House priorities. Yet this power, though wide, is not absolute. It is rooted in constitutional and statutory law. Article II of the Constitution vests executive power in the President, and charges him with the faithful execution of the law. That duty sets boundaries. The President cannot legislate, only implement. And while the courts can challenge executive overreach, it is Congress that provides the long-term counterbalance. Congress shapes the administrative state through structural design, delegation, funding, and oversight. It decides which agencies exist, what they do, and how their decisions must be made. The Administrative Procedure Act (APA), a cornerstone of modern governance, is a legislative act that mandates transparency, fairness, and public participation in agency rulemaking. Congress doesn't merely create law—it ensures the law is applied as intended. The difference in how these two branches exercise power is profound. The executive acts swiftly. The legislative acts deliberately. The President commands from the center. Congress deliberates through committees and coalitions. One responds to crises with urgency; the other reflects the consensus of a nation. This tension is not dysfunction—it's design. We've seen this interplay throughout history. Presidents have issued bold executive orders to drive environmental policy, economic reform, and public health action. Meanwhile, Congress has investigated those same agencies, reined in budgets, and rewritten authorizing statutes. Sometimes they clash. Sometimes they collaborate. But the system endures, because the balance itself is a form of accountability. As a student of public administration, I see this dual oversight as more than a procedural function. It is a reminder that no one governs alone. Our institutions are complex by intention, not by accident. They are layered, not to confuse, but to protect. Governance in a democracy must be resilient—not only against inefficiency, but against unchecked power. So the next time we read about a regulatory agency drafting a rule, pausing a program, or changing a standard, we should remember: that action is not the product of one decision, but of many. It is the result of oversight, vision, and law—shaped by both executive leadership and legislative design. In that duality, we find the essence of American public administration: governance that is powerful, but never singular. Accountable, but never isolated. Structured, but never static. Jean Richard Franck, M.A. Doctoral Student in Public Administration Writer | Policy Analyst | Advocate for Ethical and Accountable Government TIME BUSINESS NEWS
Wall Street Journal
17 minutes ago
- Wall Street Journal
Stocks Are at Their Calmest Since November, by One Measure
The stock market hasn't been this sanguine in months. So far in May, the S&P 500 has notched a daily decline of 1% or more just once. That is the lowest number of such drops in a calendar month since November, when President Trump's election victory sent stocks surging to fresh records. The S&P 500 is on track to end May with a gain of more than 6%.
