logo
Trump sees emergencies everywhere. Judges are considering whether to rein him in

Trump sees emergencies everywhere. Judges are considering whether to rein him in

Mint2 days ago
WASHINGTON
:
Across the U.S. landscape, Donald Trump sees one emergency after another, and that is posing a host of challenges for the federal courts.
Since beginning his second term, Trump has declared in dozens of presidential documents that the U.S. faces emergencies requiring him to take extraordinary actions that circumvent normal government processes. That gambit offers him a path of unilateral action instead of the uncertain route of enacting legislation through Congress.
On Inauguration Day, Trump declared national emergencies involving energy production, border crossings from Mexico and transnational cartels. In the months since, he has proclaimed that the actions of the International Criminal Court, California water regulations and protests against his immigration policies all constitute emergencies of one form or another.
The moves have spurred many lawsuits. While the details vary, the cases share common core questions: When does the law allow Trump to claim power this way? And are the emergencies he is claiming real ones?
The president's strategy faces perhaps its biggest test yet on Thursday, when his use of tariffs to address a range of commercial, political and diplomatic issues he has labeled emergencies goes before a federal appeals court in Washington. The case is expected eventually to reach the Supreme Court; if Trump wins, legal experts say he could claim broad unilateral power to regulate the economy.
Almost all presidents are aggressive in their use of executive power, but Trump 'has gone further with declaring emergencies than other presidents have," says Samuel Bray, a law professor at the University of Chicago.
Trump early in his second term has built a mixed record in court. Several courts have rejected his proclamation under a 1798 statute, the Alien Enemies Act, that Venezuela is attempting a 'predatory incursion" of U.S. territory through the unauthorized immigration of members of a criminal gang. The president has argued that the law gives him the authority to apprehend Venezuelans and remove them without the typical due process given to immigrants who are residing in the U.S. without permission.
In June, a federal appeals court in San Francisco agreed that Trump could use emergency powers to take control of the California National Guard over the objection of its regular commander in chief, Gov. Gavin Newsom, to protect federal personnel and facilities during immigration raids in Los Angeles.
Trump enjoyed some success asserting emergency powers during his first term. In 2019, after Congress declined his request to fund a wall along the Mexican border, Trump declared a national emergency and diverted to the project $2.5 billion that lawmakers had appropriated for other purposes.
Congress voted to cancel the border emergency, but Trump vetoed the resolution. Lower courts found that Trump exceeded his authority, but a 5-4 Supreme Court issued a temporary order in 2020 allowing him to continue with construction. The justices never got a chance to hear argument over the issue, as President Joe Biden terminated Trump's emergency declaration in January 2021.
Biden didn't fare as well when he sought to cancel student-loan debt to mitigate the economic impact of the Covid-19 pandemic. In 2023, the Supreme Court said Biden's plan to forgive $430 billion in debt exceeded the powers Congress granted the president to waive or modify student-loan programs in response to national emergencies.
In the tariff litigation, two federal courts found in May that Trump exceeded the authority granted by a 1977 statute, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, when he imposed tariffs to pressure foreign governments to meet U.S. demands. He said one set of tariffs was necessary to prod Canada, China and Mexico to step up their fight against fentanyl smuggling into the U.S., while another aimed to goad countries throughout the world to lower barriers against American exports.
The Constitution gives Congress the power to impose tariffs, but it can delegate authority to the president. The 1977 law allows the president to take economic steps to deal with 'unusual and extraordinary" threats to America's 'national security, foreign policy, or economy."
Whether the statute provides for tariffs at all is hotly debated, as is the difficult question of whether courts can and should second-guess a president's decision to proclaim that an emergency exists.
In court briefs, the New York wine importer VOS Selections and other companies challenging the tariffs say Trump himself acknowledged that there is no emergency.
'At least nine times, Executive Order 14,257 describes the trade deficit as 'large and persistent,'" the plaintiffs say. A persistent problem 'that has been a consistent feature of the U.S. economy for 50 years" can't be deemed an emergency, they say.
In reply, the Justice Department says that trade imbalances have grown into an emergency over recent years. But, as it has in other cases, the administration argues that judges are powerless to second-guess Trump's determinations.
'Courts cannot substitute their exercise of discretion for the president's," the government says.
Historically, that has been the practice, says Peter Shane, a constitutional scholar at New York University. 'Federal courts are usually pretty deferential to presidential fact-finding when it comes to an emergency," he says.
The Constitution provides the executive branch no explicit authority to set aside normal laws, suggesting the framers 'suspected that emergency powers would tend to kindle emergencies," as Justice Robert Jackson put it in a 1952 opinion.
Nonetheless, presidents have over time asserted extraordinary authority to deal with contingencies that Congress didn't anticipate—and take actions that Congress didn't authorize. President Richard Nixon, faced with a Democratic Congress critical of his Vietnam War policies and conservative agenda at home, took unilateral action on several initiatives.
Congress tried in the 1970s to reclaim some of the power that Nixon had consolidated in his so-called imperial presidency. The National Emergencies Act of 1976 established procedures for the president to declare emergencies, set a renewable one-year time limit on emergency declarations and gave Congress authority to cancel an emergency declaration.
Trump has invoked that act at least eight times this year.
Write to Jess Bravin at Jess.Bravin@wsj.com
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Russian woman leaves India with child: SC raps Delhi Police for ‘sheer negligence' in custody dispute case
Russian woman leaves India with child: SC raps Delhi Police for ‘sheer negligence' in custody dispute case

Indian Express

time26 minutes ago

  • Indian Express

Russian woman leaves India with child: SC raps Delhi Police for ‘sheer negligence' in custody dispute case

Hearing a child custody dispute between a Russian woman and her Indian husband, the Supreme Court on Friday said that she has left the country with the minor child due to the 'sheer negligence' of the Delhi Police. It also urged the authorities to get in touch with the Indian Embassy in Moscow to bring the minor back. 'At the outset, we are constrained to observe that the incident of taking away the child by the petitioner has happened apparently due to sheer negligence and failure of the Delhi Police in performing its duties in terms of the direction contained in… our order dated May 22, 2025,' a bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi said. The bench said that on May 22, it had directed that a discreet but strict vigil be kept on the woman. Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati, appearing for the Union government, had on the last date of hearing told the SC that the woman, after leaving her rented accommodation in Delhi, had travelled to Russia via Nepal and UAE with the child. '… that means for four days, she was in Nepal. Had the Delhi Police taken any course of action, we are quite sure that preventive measures could be taken to not allow her to board the flight,' the SC said on Friday. The bench added that 'forging/duplication of the passport of the child', which has been 'committed', was also 'apparently not considered by the Delhi Police'. The SC called this a 'flagrant violation of its orders'. Observing that it was not 'that simple' matrimonial dispute, the bench said, 'The Union of India also must keep in mind that the minor child has been taken from the custody of this court. It is not a case of a custodial dispute between the parents of the child, whose custody has not been handed over to either the father or the mother. It was in exercise of our duty as parens patriae that we were resolving the issue and the child was in the custody of the court.' Bhati said that while authorities are trying to get information from Nepal, the UAE, and Russia, foreign airlines, citing privacy, were reluctant to share travel data. But the SC said that no airline can claim privacy when a crime is committed. It maintained that the authorities should make an effort to bring the child back to the country by exploring diplomatic channels and talking to the Indian ambassador in Moscow. It gave 10 days to the Delhi Police to file a fresh status report depicting some tangible action to bring the child back. Referring to its May 22 order, the bench said that it had then asked the police to maintain discreet but effective vigil over residences of both parents and to depute women personnel who could enter the woman's residence in case of an emergency. However, this was not done even after the man complained; the court pointed out, adding that the CCTV camera footage showed the woman leaving the premises with the child through the back door. Justice Kant asked, 'What were the police doing?' He added that 'it is a clear case of criminal negligence' and that the court will not spare the police. Ananthakrishnan G. is a Senior Assistant Editor with The Indian Express. He has been in the field for over 23 years, kicking off his journalism career as a freelancer in the late nineties with bylines in The Hindu. A graduate in law, he practised in the District judiciary in Kerala for about two years before switching to journalism. His first permanent assignment was with The Press Trust of India in Delhi where he was assigned to cover the lower courts and various commissions of inquiry. He reported from the Delhi High Court and the Supreme Court of India during his first stint with The Indian Express in 2005-2006. Currently, in his second stint with The Indian Express, he reports from the Supreme Court and writes on topics related to law and the administration of justice. Legal reporting is his forte though he has extensive experience in political and community reporting too, having spent a decade as Kerala state correspondent, The Times of India and The Telegraph. He is a stickler for facts and has several impactful stories to his credit. ... Read More

Trump removes official overseeing jobs data after dismal employment report
Trump removes official overseeing jobs data after dismal employment report

The Hindu

time26 minutes ago

  • The Hindu

Trump removes official overseeing jobs data after dismal employment report

President Donald Trump on Friday (August 1, 2025) removed the head of the agency that produces the monthly jobs figures after a report showed hiring slowed in July and was much weaker in May and June than previously reported. Mr. Trump, in a post on his social media platform, alleged that the figures were manipulated for political reasons and said that Erika McEntarfer, the director of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, who was appointed by former President Joe Biden, should be fired. He provided no evidence for the charge. 'I have directed my Team to fire this Biden Political Appointee, IMMEDIATELY,' Mr. Trump said on Truth Social. 'She will be replaced with someone much more competent and qualified.' After his post, Labour Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer said on X that McEntarfer was no longer leading the bureau and that William Wiatrowski, the deputy commissioner, would serve as the acting director. 'I support the President's decision to replace Biden's Commissioner and ensure the American People can trust the important and influential data coming from BLS,' Chavez-DeRemer said. Friday's jobs report showed that just 73,000 jobs were added last month and that 258,000 fewer jobs were created in May and June than previously estimated. Ms. McEntarfer was nominated by Biden in 2023 and became the Commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics in January 2024. Commissioners typically serve four-year terms, but since they are political appointees, they can be fired. The commissioner is the only political appointee of the agency, which has hundreds of career civil servants. Mr. Trump focused much of his ire on the revisions the agency made to previous hiring data. Job gains in May were revised down to just 19,000 from 125,000, and for June they were cut to 14,000 from 147,000. In July, only 73,000 positions were added. The unemployment rate ticked up to a still-low 4.2% from 4.1%. 'No one can be that wrong? We need accurate Jobs Numbers,' Mr. Trump wrote. 'She will be replaced with someone much more competent and qualified. Important numbers like this must be fair and accurate: they can't be manipulated for political purposes.' The monthly employment report is one of the most closely watched pieces of government economic data and can cause sharp swings in financial markets. The disappointing figure sent US market indexes about 1.5% lower on Friday. While the jobs numbers are often the subject of political spin, economists and Wall Street investors — with millions of dollars at stake — have always accepted US government economic data as free from political manipulation.

U.S. employers slash hiring as Trump advances a punishing trade agenda
U.S. employers slash hiring as Trump advances a punishing trade agenda

The Hindu

time26 minutes ago

  • The Hindu

U.S. employers slash hiring as Trump advances a punishing trade agenda

U.S. hiring is slowing sharply as President Donald Trump's erratic and radical trade policies paralyse businesses and raise doubts about the outlook for the world's largest economy. U.S. employers added just 73,000 jobs last month, the Labor Department reported Friday, well short of the 1,15,000 expected. Worse, revisions shaved a stunning 2,58,000 jobs off May and June payrolls. And the unemployment rate ticked higher to 4.2% as Americans dropped out of the labour force and the ranks of the unemployed rose by 2,21,000. 'A notable deterioration in US labour market conditions appears to be underway,'' said Scott Anderson, chief U.S. economist at BMO Capital Markets. 'We have been forecasting this since the tariff and trade war erupted this spring, and more restrictive immigration restrictions were put in place. Overall, this report highlights the risk of a harder landing for the labour market.'' Economists have been warning that the rift with every US trading partner will begin to appear this summer, and the Friday jobs report appeared to sound the bell. 'We're finally in the eye of the hurricane,' said Daniel Zhao, chief economist at Glassdoor. 'After months of warning signs, the July jobs report confirms that the slowdown isn't just approaching—it's here.' US markets recoiled at the jobs report, and the Dow tumbled more than 600 points on Friday. But President Donald Trump responded to the weak report by calling for the firing of Erika McEntarfer, the director of the Labor Department's Bureau of Labor Statistics, which compiles the jobs numbers. 'I have directed my Team to fire this Biden Political Appointee, IMMEDIATELY,' Mr. Trump said on Truth Social. 'She will be replaced with someone much more competent and qualified.' Mr. Trump questioned the big revisions, but they are a standard part of the monthly jobs report. The Labor Department revises its numbers as more data comes in. Particularly since COVID-19, businesses have taken longer to respond to the government's survey on hiring. As more data has come in later than in the past, the potential for large revisions has increased. Revelations in the new data raise questions about the health of the job market and the economy as Mr. Trump pushes forward an unorthodox overhaul of American trade policy. Mr. Trump has discarded decades of U.S. efforts to lower trade barriers globally, instead imposing hefty import taxes — tariffs — on products from almost every country on earth. Trump believes the levies will bring manufacturing back to America and raise money to pay for the massive tax cuts he signed into law on July 4. Tariffs lead to price rise Mainstream economists warned that the cost of the tariffs will be passed along to Americans, both businesses and households. That has begun. Walmart, Procter&Gamble, Ford, Best Buy, Adidas, Nike, Mattel, Shein, Temu, Stanley, Black&Decker, have all hiked prices due to U.S. tariffs. Economists at Goldman Sachs estimate that overseas exporters have absorbed just one-fifth of the rising costs from tariffs, while Americans and US businesses have picked up the lion's share of the tab. Mr. Trump has sowed uncertainty in the erratic way he's rolled the tariffs out — announcing, then suspending them, then coming up with new ones. Overnight, Mr. Trump signed an executive order that set new tariffs on a wide swath of U.S. trading partners that go into effect on August 7, and that comes after a flurry of unexpected tariff-related actions this week. 'There was a clear, significant, immediate tariff effect on the labour market and employment growth essentially stalled, as we were dealing with so much uncertainty about the outlook for the economy and for tariffs,' said Blerina Uruci, chief U.S. economist for the brokerage T. Rowe Price. Still, Uruci said the data suggests we could be past the worst, as hiring actually did pick up a bit in July from May and June's depressed levels. 'I'm not overly pessimistic on the US economy based on this morning's data,' she said, though she does think that hiring will remain muted in the coming months as the number of available workers remains limited due to reduced immigration and an ageing population. 'Because of immigration policy, labour supply growth has nearly ground to a halt,' said Guy Berger, senior fellow at the Burning Glass Institute, which studies employment trends. 'So we're going to have very weak employment growth. And we look like southern Europe or Japan.' Still, with fewer workers available, the economy doesn't need to generate many jobs to soak up the unemployed. That could keep the unemployment rate from climbing much, Berger added. Mr. Trump has sold the tariff hikes as a way to boost American manufacturing, but factories cut 11,000 jobs last month after shedding 15,000 in June and 11,000 in May. The federal government, where employment has been targeted by the Trump administration, lost 12,000 jobs. Jobs in administration and support fell by nearly 20,000. Healthcare companies added 55,400 jobs last month – accounting for 76% of the jobs added in July and offering another sign that recent job gains have been narrowly concentrated. The department originally reported that state and local governments had added 64,000 education jobs in June. The revisions on Friday slashed those jobs to less than 10,000. Those revisions also revealed that the US economy has generated an average of just 85,000 jobs a month this year, barely half last year's average of 168,000 and well below an average of 400,000 from 2021-2023 as the economy rebounded from COVID-19 lockups. The weak jobs data makes it more likely that Trump will get one thing that he most fervently desires: A cut in short-term interest rates by the Federal Reserve, which often — though not always — can lead to lower rates for mortgages, car loans, and credit cards. Fed Chair Jerome Powell and other Fed officials have repeatedly pointed to a healthy job market as a reason that they could take time to evaluate how Trump's tariffs were affecting inflation and the broader economy. Now that the assessment has been undercut, it will put more pressure on the Fed to reduce borrowing costs. Wall Street investors sharply raised their expectations for a rate cut at the Fed's next meeting in September after the report was released. On Wednesday, the Fed left its key rate unchanged for the fifth consecutive meeting and Powell signalled little urgency to reduce rates anytime soon. He said the 'labour market is solid' with 'historically low unemployment.' But he also acknowledged there is a 'downside risk' to employment stemming from the slow pace of hiring that was evident even before Friday's weaker numbers. The current situation is a sharp reversal from the hiring boom of just three years ago, when desperate employers were handing out signing bonuses and introducing perks such as Fridays off, fertility benefits and even pet insurance to recruit and keep workers. The rate of people quitting their jobs — a sign they're confident they can land something better — has fallen from the record heights of 2021 and 2022 and is now weaker than before the pandemic. Drees Homes, a homebuilder based outside Cincinnati in Fort Mitchell, Kentucky, has hired about 50 people over the past year, bringing its workforce to around 950. Pamela Rader, Drees' vice president for human resources, it's 'gotten a little bit easier'' to find workers. A couple of years ago, Rader said jobseekers were focused on getting more pay. Now, she said, they emphasise stable employment, a better work-life balance, and prospects for advancement

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store