Judge temporarily blocks Trump tariffs for Vernon Hills toy company
The Brief
A federal judge temporarily exempted a Vernon Hills-based toy company from Trump-era tariffs, siding with the company's lawsuit challenging the president's authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act.
The company, which owns Learning Resources and hand2mind, argued the tariffs threatened its survival and the jobs of about 500 employees in the U.S. and U.K.
The ruling includes a two-week pause for appeal; the judge said the company would suffer irreparable harm without the injunction.
VERNON HILLS, Ill. - A federal judge on Thursday ruled in favor of a Vernon Hills toy company, granting it a temporary reprieve from tariffs imposed by President Donald Trump, as a growing number of lawsuits continue to challenge the policy.
The decision means that, for now, the Trump Administration is not permitted to collect tariffs from the business, which makes some of its toys in the United States but manufactures the majority of its products overseas.
What we know
The family-owned educational toy company, which consists of several brands including Learning Resources and hand2mind, called Thursday's ruling a major victory—sharing that excessive tariffs have the potential to put them out of business.
With rising costs and ever-changing trade policies, small and mid-sized businesses like theirs are among those struggling to navigate the unpredictable nature of the economy.
"We just don't know what tomorrow is going to bring," explained Elana Ruffman, VP of Marketing & Product Development with hand2mind. "How do we know as a manufacturer where we should make our products?"
It's why the company is taking its concerns to court.
In early April, Learning Resources and hand2mind sued President Donald Trump, arguing that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), which Trump invoked, does not authorize the president to impose tariffs.
"We are an importer, about 60 percent of our products are made in China," Ruffman said. "The challenge with the reciprocal tariff policy, it was essentially a ban, there was no way you can import at those prices."
A 33-page court opinion released Thursday sided with the company, stating that without preliminary injunction, the business "will sustain significant and unrecoverable losses." Furthermore, the federal judge also denied the Trump Administration's motion to transfer the lawsuit to the United States Court of International Trade (CIT).
The ruling included a two-week pause anticipating an appeal from the Trump administration, which has already been filed.
What they're saying
Based in Vernon Hills, the toy company employs about 500 people in the United States and 50 others in the United Kingdom. Specializing in educational toys and resources, its products are used in about half of U.S. school districts, according to Ruffman.
Ruffman, who is the fourth generation in her family to work at the company, shares that sweeping tariffs could be devastating to the business, but more importantly—to its employees.
"We want to protect all the employees that work for us so that was why we decided to bring the lawsuit. We are a family business, we've been around for over 100 years, and we take our commitment very seriously," Ruffman said. "There are 500 people who work for us and their families depend on us for their livelihood and that's something that we don't mess around with."
Ruffman adds that on a larger scale, rising prices and potential cutbacks caused by tariffs could limit children's access to educational toys worldwide.
What's next
Now, Ruffman says they will wait for the legal process to play out and tells FOX 32 Chicago she won't be surprised if the case makes it all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.
RELATED: Appeals court temporarily reinstates Trump tariffs
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
31 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Huntington Beach to Trump admin: 'We are not a sanctuary city'
The Brief The Trump administration published a list of 500+ "sanctuary jurisdictions" they say are obstructing immigration enforcement. Huntington Beach was included on the list. In January, Huntington Beach actually declared itself a "non-sanctuary city." HUNTINGTON BEACH, Calif. - The city of Huntington Beach is speaking out after the Trump administration put the city on a list of more than 500 "sanctuary jurisdictions," which the administration says is obstructing federal immigration enforcement. There's just one issue. The city legally declared that they were the exact opposite earlier this year. RELATED: Trump administration applies pressure on 'sanctuary jurisdictions' with public listing The backstory The Department of Homeland Security published a list of more than 500 communities on Friday that they say are not complying with federal immigration enforcement. DHS said that it used several things to come up with their list, including whether the community self-identifies as a sanctuary, whether they offer protection to undocumented immigrants and more. This is all a response to an executive order President Donald Trump signed in April. Every jurisdiction on the list will get a notice from DHS and the Department of Justice. According to the executive order, jurisdictions that don't start complying with immigration enforcement could lose out on federal grants and contracts. Included on the list is the state of California as a whole, all but 10 of the state's 58 counties, and more than 60 cities in California. Among those listed is Huntington Beach in Orange County. SEE THE FULL LIST HERE What we know But, back in January, the Huntington Beach City Council voted unanimously to declare themselves a "non-sanctuary city." The move was a response to California Gov. Gavin Newsom's plans to "Trump-proof" the state shortly before Trump took office. RELATED: Gov. Newsom says he's going to 'Trump proof' California state laws Needless to say, city officials are confused as to why they were put on DHS' list on Friday. What they're saying "We adopted a formal policy on this. It went before the council, and we unanimously agreed that Huntington Beach is not a sanctuary city," Huntington Beach Mayor Pat Burns said in a press release on Friday. "We took deliberate action to make our non-sanctuary status clear." Burns said the city's inclusion on the list is either a misprint or a mistake. And Huntington Beach isn't the only one. "We're hearing there are other local governments that are also misidentified, including Baltimore, Maryland; Las Vegas, Nevada; and Shasta County, California — all of which have either declared themselves non-sanctuary jurisdictions or follow non-sanctuary policies," Burns said. What's next Burns said he has reached out to contacts in the federal government to get Huntington Beach taken off the list. Federal officials said the list would be updated regularly. The Source Information in this story is from the Department of Homeland Security's list of "sanctuary jurisdictions," a press release from the City of Huntington Beach, and previous FOX 11 reports.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Musk Gives Crazy Explanation for Sporting Black Eye in Oval Office with Trump
Elon Musk joined President Donald Trump in the Oval Office to mark his last official day with DOGE where the billionaire appeared to have a literal black eye as he made his departure from the White House. The world's richest man stood alongside Trump as he made remarks and the pair took questions. Musk, wearing his standard black baseball cap, this one reading 'DOGE' and t-shirt under his jacket, had bruising around his right eye. Finally, a reporter referenced the black eye and asked Musk if his eye was ok. First Musk joked that he wasn't anywhere near France, a reference to the recent viral video of the French First Lady pushing French President Emmanuel Macron in the face. However, then Musk's explanation got even weirder. 'I was just horsing around with little X, and I said 'go ahead, punch me in the face,' and he did,' Musk explained. X is the tech billionaire's five-year-old son who has regularly appeared with Musk and the president at the White House. 'Turns out, even a five-year-old punching you in the face actually,' Musk continued before being interrupted by Trump. 'That was X that did that?' the president asked. 'X could do it. If you knew X, he could do it.' While X has regularly been spotted hanging out inside the Oval Office as his dad met with Trump and tagged along for visits to Capitol Hill, he was notably absent during the farewell remarks on Friday. Musk explained his absence by saying he was with his mom. The tech billionaire added that he didn't really 'feel much' at the time when they were horsing around, but then it bruised. Musk might be heading out as an official 'Special Government Employee' but he vowed on Friday that the work of DOGE would continue. 'The DOGE team will only grow stronger over time. The DOGE influence will only grow stronger,' Musk insisted. Musk, decked out in a shirt that read 'The Dogefather' similar to 'The Godfather' called it a 'way of life.'
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Trump threatens Washington funding in executive order targeting sanctuary states
May 30—President Donald Trump sent a message to Washington state officials Friday when he signed an executive order designating nearly the entire state as part of what he called "sanctuary jurisdictions," for which he earlier had threatened to cut off federal funding. The list of "sanctuary jurisdictions" appears to name every Washington county except Adams. The list included Spokane County and also listed the cities of Seattle, Olympia, Tacoma, Everett and Yakima, but it did not name Spokane. The "Protecting American Communities from Criminal Aliens" executive order required the formation of a list of states and cities that Trump wrote were obstructing the enforcement of federal immigration laws. "Sanctuary jurisdictions including cities, counties, and states that are deliberately and shamefully obstructing the enforcement of federal immigration laws endangering American communities," the order reads. "Sanctuary cities protect dangerous criminal aliens from facing consequences and put law enforcement in peril." However, the order does not take the next step and say that Trump intends to withhold federal funding from those places, like he tried earlier this year with San Francisco, Santa Clara County, and 14 other cities and counties it deems "sanctuary jurisdictions." "This is an eye-roller, a head-scratcher, but it doesn't come to me as a surprise at all," said Rep. Timm Ormsby, D-Spokane, who is chair of the state House Appropriations Committee. Trump's "whole interest is to have jurisdictions bend the knee to whatever fleeting rant he happens to be in." Spokane County Commissioner Al French said he believes Spokane County made the list solely because of state law and insisted it is not a sanctuary county. He said the commission will meet with legal experts Monday to consider how to proceed while being mindful of the executive order. "It's concerning, because the executive order could jeopardize our funding from the feds," French said. "And not by anything we did, but by association." Spokane Mayor Lisa Brown said only that city officials continue to follow all applicable laws but did not directly address the executive order. Rep. Joe Schmick, R-Colfax, pointed to the situation in Adams County, which Washington Attorney General Nick Brown sued earlier this year and accused officials there of cooperating with immigration enforcement in violation of the Keep Washington Working Act, which lawmakers passed in 2019. That law protects the rights of immigrant communities from unnecessary contact with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. As a result of the law, local police departments and sheriff's offices aren't supposed to share information with ICE or U.S. Border Patrol agents upon request, Aaron Korthuis, a staff attorney at Northwest Immigrant Rights Project, told The Spokesman-Review in March. Korthuis said the law also prohibits local officials from transferring individuals in custody to federal authorities or detaining individuals based solely on their immigration status, or to ask about a person's immigration status. Based on that law, Brown filed suit in Spokane County Superior Court in March alleging that Adams County Sheriff Dale Wagner held persons in custody based on their immigration status, gave federal agents confidential information and helped those agents question detainees in violation of the 2019 law. Following the filing of the lawsuit, Wagner said in a statement at the time that it was a "disappointing attempt to hinder our ability to uphold public safety." Schmick, of Colfax, and State Sen. Mark Schoesler, R-Ritzville, both sided with Wagner, when contacted Friday about the executive order. "I believe that we need to follow the federal law ... especially when people are in jail and ICE is looking for them," Schmick said. "They should be turned over to ICE so they can be deported. We do not want criminals on our streets." Asked if he feared that Trump may try to withhold federal funding to Washington, Schmick said local officials "better change the rules. I thought when they passed (Keep Washington Working) way back when, that we were setting ourselves up for problems. "Now we are the problem." Schoesler noted that states changed speed limits and drinking ages in the past based on threats from federal officials to withhold transportation funds. "If you look at the people being protected by sanctuary cities, they are some pretty bad people. I live in Adams County. They are not grabbing people from the fields and factories," Schoesler said. "We are talking about people who committed crimes. "Sheriff Wagner wants to follow the federal law. If you are a criminal and not here legally, he wants to cooperate. At this point, we'd do better if Nick Brown tried working with these people instead of having a lawsuit every week." Mike Faulk, a spokesman for the attorney general's office, said Trump's executive order "is merely a list, and one that appears to be riddled with errors and false claims," he wrote. "Our bottom line, based on the facts, is that Keep Washington Working does not interfere with federal immigration law." Ormsby, the lawmaker from Spokane, called the executive order just the latest in a litany of proclamations and assertions coming from Trump. "It changes regularly, daily and hourly," Ormsby said. "My reaction is I'm very pleased that we have an attorney general in Washington state who is actively participating in lawsuits to stop some of this silliness that is coming out. "This is just the latest in a long list of gobsmacking things that have come out of this administration," he continued. "While it's difficult to take it super seriously, because it's in the early stages and will have to go through a legal review, I don't think it's an immediate issue for us." Spokesman-Review reporters Nick Gibson and Emry Dinman contributed to this report.
