What happens now that a US court has blocked most of Trump's import tariffs?
A FEDERAL COURT in New York has handed US President Donald Trump a big setback, blocking his audacious plan to impose massive taxes on imports from almost every country in the world.
A three-judge panel of the US Court of International Trade ruled that Trump overstepped his authority when he invoked the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to declare a national emergency and justify the sweeping tariffs.
The tariffs overturned decades of US 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 US Court of International Trade has jurisdiction over civil cases involving trade.
Its decisions can be appealed to the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington and ultimately to the Supreme Court, where the legal challenges to Trump's 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 US trading partners and levies he imposed before that on China, Mexico and Canada.
On 2 April, 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 US 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 had invoked the law to impose tariffs on Canada, Mexico and China, saying that the illegal flow of immigrants and drugs across the US border amounted to a national emergency and that the three countries needed to do more to stop it.
The US 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.
Advertisement
The tariffs are being challenged in at least seven lawsuits. In the ruling on Wednesday, the trade court combined two of the cases — one brought by five small businesses and another by 12 US states.
The ruling does leave in place other Trump tariffs, including those on foreign steel, aluminium 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 US 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 to 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 US 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'.
She said: 'Partners negotiating hard during the 90-day day tariff pause period may be tempted to hold off making further concessions to the US until there is more legal clarity.
'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.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Irish Times
40 minutes ago
- Irish Times
Trump announces 50% steel tariffs and hails ‘blockbuster' deal with Japan
Donald Trump announced on Friday he was doubling foreign tariffs on steel imports to 50 per cent, as the US president celebrated a 'blockbuster' agreement for Japan-based Nippon Steel to invest in US Steel during a rally in Pennsylvania. Surrounded by men in orange hardhats at a US Steel plant in West Mifflin, Mr Trump unveiled the new levies, declaring that the dramatic rate increase would 'even further secure the steel industry in the United States'. 'Nobody is going to get around that,' Mr Trump said, of the tariff rate hike from what was 25 per cent. In a social media post after his remarks, Mr Trump announced that the 50 per cent tariffs on steel would also apply to imported aluminium and would take effect on June 4th. READ MORE 'This will be yet another BIG jolt of great news for our wonderful steel and aluminium workers,' he stated in the post. It was not immediately clear how the announcement would affect the trade deal negotiated earlier this month that saw tariffs on UK steel and aluminium reduced to zero. Mr Trump's Friday tariffs announcement came a day after a federal appeals court temporarily allowed his tariffs to remain in effect staying a decision by a US trade court that blocked the president from imposing the duties. The trade court ruling, however, does not impede the president's ability to unilaterally raise tariffs on steel imports, an authority granted under a national security provision called section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act. The precise relationship between Nippon Steel and US Steel raised questions on Friday, even for some of Mr Trump's allies. The president has thrown his full support behind the deal, months after insisting he was 'totally against' a $14.9 billion bid by Nippon Steel for its US rival. [ Ireland cannot base its economic strategy on the 'Taco' theory – Trump Always Chickens Out Opens in new window ] The United Steelworkers union had previously urged Mr Trump to reject Nippon's bid, dismissing the Japanese firm's commitments to invest in the US as 'flashy promises' and claiming it was 'simply seeking to undercut our domestic industry from the inside'. Speaking to steelworkers, Mr Trump said that US Steel would 'stay an American company' after what he is now calling 'a partnership' with Nippon. But US Steel's website links to a stand-alone site with the combined branding of the two companies that features a statement describing the transaction as 'US Steel's agreement to be acquired by NSC'. On the website touting the deal, there were also multiple references to 'Nippon Steel's acquisition of US Steel' and the 'potential sale of US Steel to Nippon Steel'. Even pro-Trump commentators on Fox expressed bafflement over the exact nature of the deal. 'This is being described as 'a partnership', this deal between Nippon and US Steel – but then it's described as an acquisition on the US Steel website,' Fox host Laura Ingraham pointed out on her Friday night show. [ Trump and the 'nasty' Taco trade Opens in new window ] She asked a guest from another pro-Trump outlet, Breitbart: 'Who owns the majority stake in this company?' When the guest said he did not know, Ms Ingraham suggested Mr Trump might not be aware of the details. 'I don't know if he was fully informed about the terms of the deal. We just don't know.' Mr Trump's predecessor, Joe Biden, had blocked Nippon's acquisition, citing national security concerns, during his final weeks in office. During his remarks at the rally, Mr Trump gloated that the Nippon investment would once again make the American steelmaker 'synonymous with greatness'. He said protections were included to 'ensure that all steel workers will keep their jobs and all facilities in the United States will remain open and thriving' and said Nippon had committed to maintaining all of US Steel's operating blast furnaces for the next decade. The president also promised that every US steelworker would soon receive a $5,000 bonus – prompting the crowd to start a round of 'U-S-A!' chants. Mr Trump told the steelworkers in attendance that there was 'a lot of money coming your way'. 'We won't be able to call this section a rust belt any more,' Trump said. 'It'll be a golden belt.' During the event, Mr Trump invited local members of United Steelworkers on to the stage to promote the Nippon deal, which saw its leader break with the union to support it. Praising the president, Jason Zugai, vice-president of Irvin local 2227, said he believed the investments would be 'life-changing'. But the powerful United Steelworkers union remained wary. 'Our primary concern remains with the impact that this merger of US Steel into a foreign competitor will have on national security, our members and the communities where we live and work,' United Steelworkers president David McCall said in a statement. 'Issuing press releases and making political speeches is easy. Binding commitments are hard.' Mr Trump framed the administration's drive to boost domestic steel production as 'not just a matter of dignity or prosperity or pride' but as 'above all, a matter of national security'. He blamed 'decades of Washington betrayals and incompetence and stupidity and corruption' for hollowing out the once-dominant US steel industry, as the jobs 'melted away, just like butter'. 'We don't want America's future to be built with shoddy steel from Shanghai. We want it built with the strength and the pride of Pittsburgh,' he said. In his remarks at a US steel plant, Mr Trump also repeated many of the false claims that have become a feature of his rallies including the lie that the 2020 election was stolen from him. He gloated over his 2024 victory and, gesturing toward his ear that was grazed by a would-be assassin's bullet last year at a rally in Butler, Pennsylvania, said it was proof that a higher power was watching over him. He also called on congressional Republicans to align behind his 'one big, beautiful bill,' urging attendees to lobby their representatives and senators to support the measure. – Guardian service

The Journal
an hour ago
- The Journal
'Love nonetheless': EU's top diplomat says Trump's 'tough love' on defence better than nothing
THE EUROPEAN UNION'S diplomatic chief Kaja Kallas has said the bloc is beefing up defence spending after 'tough love' from the Trump administration, as she called for stronger ties to counter China's 'economic might'. Speaking at the Shangri-La defence forum in Singapore, Kallas was responding to comments by US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth, who called President Donald Trump's insistence on more military spending 'tough love'. 'It's love nonetheless, so it's better than no love,' Kallas quipped when asked later about Hegseth's speech. Brussels' relationship with Washington was not broken, Kallas stressed, saying she spoke to Hegseth on Friday. 'You heard his speech. He was actually quite positive about Europe, so there's definitely some love there,' she said. Trump has consistently pressed NATO countries to increase defence spending, asking for as much as five percent of GDP and saying Washington will no longer tolerate freeloaders. Kallas said 'there are different countries in Europe and some of us have realised a long time ago that we need to invest in defence'. 'The European Union has shifted gear and reimagined our own paradigm as a peace project backed up with hard defence,' she said. 'It is a good thing we are doing more, but what I want to stress is that the security of Europe and the security of the Pacific is very much interlinked,' she added. Advertisement Kallas pointed to Ukraine, where North Korean soldiers were already operating and China was providing military hardware to Russia. 'There were some very strong messages in the US secretary of defence speech regarding China,' Kallas said. 'I think again, if you are worried about China, you should be worried about Russia,' she said. Kallas said the EU wanted to build 'partnerships in our mutual interest' in the Indo-Pacific region, including in the field of defence and economy. But the EU is also bringing economic power to the table, she said. Kallas disagreed with suggestions that Washington should focus on the Indo-Pacific region and Europe concentrate on its own patch. 'I really think if you look at the economic might of China, I think… the big countries or the superpowers sometimes overestimate their own strength,' she said. China's economic dominance could only be tackled together with 'like-minded partners like the United States, like the UK, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, and South Korea… and Singapore,' said Kallas. Speaking earlier, Hegseth told delegates 'we're pushing our allies in Europe to own more of their own security to invest in their defence'. 'Thanks to President Trump they are stepping up,' he said. - © AFP 2025

The Journal
an hour ago
- The Journal
What's the 'Taco trade' talk on Wall Street about that's annoyed Donald Trump so much?
A FEW WEEKS ago a Financial Times journalist coined a phrase which was duly taken up by Wall Street traders, and has since sparked fury from the US President: 'Taco trade' – with 'Taco' meaning Trump Always Chickens Out. When a reporter asked Trump (politely, mind you) what he thought about the phrase, which has found popularity amongst online finance bros, it would be an understatement to say he shot her down. 'Don't ever say what you said. That's a nasty question, to me that's the nastiest question,' he told her. The new trading jargon refers to Trump's now well-established pattern of setting high tariffs on imports from other countries, and then eventually lowering them, or putting a pause on them altogether. In Trump's view, he has never backed down on tariffs. He told the reporter who asked him the question: 'It's called negotiation. If I set a number, if I set a ridiculous high number and I go down a little bit – a little bit…' Basically, he's arguing that his high tariff announcement have put the US in an empowered starting position at the negotiating table with other world powers (and, at one stage, a mostly barren, uninhabited islands home to a group of penguins near the Antartica). It sounds a bit like telling poker opponents your strategy in-depth directly before the game. But has it been working? Most recently the Trump administration's tariff agenda suffered a blow when a federal court in New York ruled that Trump had acted outside the authority of the presidency when he used the 1977 International Emergency Powers Act to impose sweeping tariffs – which are taxes on imports – that applied to goods from almost every country in the world. However, an appeals court then temporarily paused the ruling, giving Trump a short-term win, and it's expected that he will take the case to the Supreme Court if he loses this round. So that's not really an example of Trump chickening out, though there are other precedents. Advertisement Either way, 'Taco trade' is not actually meant as an insult by those using it, though the markets soared when Trump's sweeping tariffs were paused by the courts. Stock market investors are looking at Trump's strategy to try and turn a profit on tariff talk. It works pretty simply: Trump announces tariffs on a country or a bloc, such as the EU; the market dips; investors buy stocks at a cheaper rate; Trump ditches or pauses or lowers the tariffs; the market recovers, and investors sell at a higher price. It worked that way earlier this month when Trump threatened and then, three days later, agreed to delay a 50% tariff on the European Union. After markets fell considerably in reaction to the initial threat, Wall Street rallied on news of Trump's change of hearts. The same thing happened at the start of April, when Trump announced reciprocal tariffs on virtually all of the US's trading partners, and then a week later announced a delay. Market rollercoaster Yesterday, Trump accused China's President Xi Jinping of violating a truce on raised tariffs agreed between the countries two weeks ago, without elaborating on how China had done so. The markets' tariff rollercoaster has even led to Democrats raising concerns about potential insider trading within the Trump administration. 'Who in the administration knew about Trump's latest tariff flipflop ahead of time? Did anyone buy or sell stocks, and profit at the public's expense?' Senator Adam Schiff asked back in April, when the initial delay on reciprocal tariffs was announced. The thing is, all the available polling has shown that Trump's base is unfazed by his moves on tariffs, and that his 2024 voters feel confident about how he is handling the economy. However, voters may be less sanguine if prices rise. Walmart, America's biggest retailer, has warned that it may have to increase prices in response to even the softer tariffs on China agreed this month. Though Trump objects to the 'Taco' acronym, his explanation of what he is doing with tariffs doesn't contradict it. Maybe he's just annoyed because it's catchy. Readers like you are keeping these stories free for everyone... A mix of advertising and supporting contributions helps keep paywalls away from valuable information like this article. Over 5,000 readers like you have already stepped up and support us with a monthly payment or a once-off donation. Learn More Support The Journal