Latest news with #BakerDonelson
Yahoo
3 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Trump's tariffs are headed for a constitutional showdown at the Supreme Court that could reshape presidential power for decades
The Trump administration is preparing for a Supreme Court battle that could reshape presidential power by deciding the extent of the executive branch's authority over tariffs, which was originally granted to Congress by the Constitution. The administration appealed after many of its recent tariffs were invalidated by a federal trade court, which argued the president's actions were too sweeping and cut into Congress' authority. President Donald Trump's struck-down tariffs are almost guaranteed to end up before the Supreme Court, experts say, and the outcome is a toss-up that could shape presidential power for years to come. The Supreme Court rarely opines on trade issues, said Lee Smith, shareholder and leader of the international trade and national security practice at law firm Baker Donelson. The last case it heard on the topic was decided in 2009—U.S. v. Eurodif S.A., which dealt with the 'anti-dumping' duties on low enriched uranium, he said. Yet, this week, the New York-based Court of International Trade set up a future Supreme Court battle royale when it invalidated many of Trump's tariffs. The tariffs in question, including those imposed on Mexico and China, were undergirded by the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), which gives the President 'broad authority to regulate a variety of economic transactions following a declaration of national emergency.' Smith said the administration's decision to use the IEEPA as justification for the struck-down tariffs was likely made to move things along faster than it could have using other provisions of U.S. trade law. But the Court of International Trade argued that the tariff action was so sweeping it took authority away from Congress, which was granted the power to levy tariffs by the Constitution. The Trump administration has appealed the court's decision, and has signaled that it will elevate the issue to the Supreme Court if it loses. Now, the Supreme Court will likely need to decide how far the president's power over tariffs goes—after years of past U.S. leaders expanding their power over tariffs, with the acquiescence of Congress. 'It's a constitutional question,' Smith told Fortune. 'The Trump administration is taking it up no matter what, if they lose. The other side has already won—the Court of International Trade. So, if they lose the Court of Appeals, they're going to want the Supreme Court to reinstate the earlier decision.' Trump fought several court battles over tariffs during his first administration, especially over his tariffs on China, which were justified with a different provision of U.S. trade law. While none reached the Supreme Court, he was largely successful, said Smith, and it's possible, although not guaranteed, Trump may succeed this time around because the court's conservative majority has shown 'a lot of deference to this president,' said Smith. Still, since Trump last defended tariffs in court during his first administration, several groundbreaking cases decided by the Supreme Court overturned precedents which could affect the administration's odds. Stavros Gadinis, a law professor at U.C. Berkeley, said two cases, West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency and Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, which overturned the Chevron Doctrine, signaled that the Supreme Court has been paying attention to expanding executive power. Broadly, the decisions in both of these cases imply that any president seeking to exercise powers under vague or ambiguous statutes is subject to more scrutiny and requires more evidence and support for their actions than before. 'When, initially, those rulings were issued, a Democratic administration was in the White House, and the Republicans were very happy about it,' Gadinis told Fortune. 'But now that the situation is reversed these rulings could suggest more checks on how a Republican administration interprets certain statutes.' Thanks to the overturning of the Chevron doctrine, the courts don't need to automatically defer to the administration's definition of ambiguous terms used by Trump to back his tariffs such as 'national security' or 'retaliation.' Instead these definitions will be decided by the court, which may or may not agree with the administration's definition, said Gadinis. It's not guaranteed the Trump administration will lose at the Supreme Court. Yet, during his first administration, Trump officials gathered evidence and followed set procedures—for example by opening an investigation into China on intellectual property, technology transfer, and innovation. The administration did not follow the same procedure for the recently struck down tariffs, said Gadinis. 'These kinds of principles—the procedural background was just not in place in this particular set of times. So, this seems broader than what (the courts) upheld back then, and therefore more likely to fall,' Gadinis told Fortune. This story was originally featured on
Yahoo
3 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Trump's tariffs are headed for a constitutional showdown at the Supreme Court that could reshape presidential power for decades
The Trump administration is preparing for a Supreme Court battle that could reshape presidential power by deciding the extent of the executive branch's authority over tariffs, which was originally granted to Congress by the Constitution. The administration appealed after many of its recent tariffs were invalidated by a federal trade court, which argued the president's actions were too sweeping and cut into Congress' authority. President Donald Trump's struck-down tariffs are almost guaranteed to end up before the Supreme Court, experts say, and the outcome is a toss-up that could shape presidential power for years to come. The Supreme Court rarely opines on trade issues, said Lee Smith, shareholder and leader of the international trade and national security practice at law firm Baker Donelson. The last case it heard on the topic was decided in 2009—U.S. v. Eurodif S.A., which dealt with the 'anti-dumping' duties on low enriched uranium, he said. Yet, this week, the New York-based Court of International Trade set up a future Supreme Court battle royale when it invalidated many of Trump's tariffs. The tariffs in question, including those imposed on Mexico and China, were undergirded by the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), which gives the President 'broad authority to regulate a variety of economic transactions following a declaration of national emergency.' Smith said the administration's decision to use the IEEPA as justification for the struck-down tariffs was likely made to move things along faster than it could have using other provisions of U.S. trade law. But the Court of International Trade argued that the tariff action was so sweeping it took authority away from Congress, which was granted the power to levy tariffs by the Constitution. The Trump administration has appealed the court's decision, and has signaled that it will elevate the issue to the Supreme Court if it loses. Now, the Supreme Court will likely need to decide how far the president's power over tariffs goes—after years of past U.S. leaders expanding their power over tariffs, with the acquiescence of Congress. 'It's a constitutional question,' Smith told Fortune. 'The Trump administration is taking it up no matter what, if they lose. The other side has already won—the Court of International Trade. So, if they lose the Court of Appeals, they're going to want the Supreme Court to reinstate the earlier decision.' Trump fought several court battles over tariffs during his first administration, especially over his tariffs on China, which were justified with a different provision of U.S. trade law. While none reached the Supreme Court, he was largely successful, said Smith, and it's possible, although not guaranteed, Trump may succeed this time around because the court's conservative majority has shown 'a lot of deference to this president,' said Smith. Still, since Trump last defended tariffs in court during his first administration, several groundbreaking cases decided by the Supreme Court overturned precedents which could affect the administration's odds. Stavros Gadinis, a law professor at U.C. Berkeley, said two cases, West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency and Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, which overturned the Chevron Doctrine, signaled that the Supreme Court has been paying attention to expanding executive power. Broadly, the decisions in both of these cases imply that any president seeking to exercise powers under vague or ambiguous statutes is subject to more scrutiny and requires more evidence and support for their actions than before. 'When, initially, those rulings were issued, a Democratic administration was in the White House, and the Republicans were very happy about it,' Gadinis told Fortune. 'But now that the situation is reversed these rulings could suggest more checks on how a Republican administration interprets certain statutes.' Thanks to the overturning of the Chevron doctrine, the courts don't need to automatically defer to the administration's definition of ambiguous terms used by Trump to back his tariffs such as 'national security' or 'retaliation.' Instead these definitions will be decided by the court, which may or may not agree with the administration's definition, said Gadinis. It's not guaranteed the Trump administration will lose at the Supreme Court. Yet, during his first administration, Trump officials gathered evidence and followed set procedures—for example by opening an investigation into China on intellectual property, technology transfer, and innovation. The administration did not follow the same procedure for the recently struck down tariffs, said Gadinis. 'These kinds of principles—the procedural background was just not in place in this particular set of times. So, this seems broader than what (the courts) upheld back then, and therefore more likely to fall,' Gadinis told Fortune. This story was originally featured on
Business Journals
21-04-2025
- Business
- Business Journals
Baker Donelson expands into New Jersey with health law hires from Epstein Becker Green
Nationally, the Memphis firm has over 20 offices, with more than 700 attorneys. One of Memphis' largest firms announced today, April 21, a major expansion into the Northeast. Memphis-based law firm Baker Donelson has hired 26 new attorneys and launched two offices in New Jersey. One office will be in Princeton and the other in Metropark. The firm is currently operating out of temporary locations in New Jersey and seeks to establish permanent office space "in the coming months," according to a news release. The new attorneys specialize in health care transactions, litigation, and real estate. All join Baker Donelson from New York-based national firm Epstein Becker Green. With the expansion, Baker Donelson is expanding its Health Law Group, which is one of the largest in the country. That group features more than 200 attorneys in 11 states and Washington, D.C. "A key aspect of our strategic vision is elevating our ability to serve clients as trusted advisors with industry depth and proactive counsel," Baker Donelson chair and CEO Timothy M. Lupinacci said in the release. "This includes growth both within our existing footprint and beyond." Baker Donelson's new hires include Gary Herschman, who will serve as co-chair of Baker Donelson's Health Care Transactions Group; Anjana Patel, who will oversee the Metropark and Princeton offices as managing shareholder; and Anthony Argiropoulos, a national litigator who will bring his entire team of litigators and professionals to the firm. Of the 26 new attorney hires, 17 join as shareholders, seven as associates, and two as of counsel. Additionally, six support staff and two paralegals have joined Baker Donelson. Nationally, Baker Donelson has over 20 offices, with more than 700 attorneys. Sign up for the Business Journal's free morning and afternoon daily newsletters to receive the latest business news impacting the Memphis metro area. Download the free Memphis Business Journal app for breaking news alerts on your phone.
Associated Press
21-04-2025
- Business
- Associated Press
Baker Donelson Adds 26 Attorneys in Major Expansion of Health Law and Litigation Practices, Grows Geographic Reach into Northeast
Leading Health Attorneys, Commercial Litigators from Epstein Becker Green Launch Baker Donelson's New Jersey Presence MEMPHIS, Tenn., April 21, 2025 /PRNewswire/ -- Baker Donelson has added 26 new attorneys, including a New Jersey-based health care transactional team, a litigation team, and several real estate attorneys in a move that marks a significant expansion of the Firm's nationally recognized Health Law Group and its geographic reach, launching new offices in Princeton and Metropark (Iselin). The addition also includes attorneys who are nationally recognized commercial litigators, significantly extending the scope of Baker Donelson's national commercial litigation practice. Baker Donelson Chair and CEO Timothy M. Lupinacci said, 'A key aspect of our strategic vision is elevating our ability to serve clients as trusted advisors with industry depth and proactive counsel. This includes growth both within our existing footprint and beyond, so when we saw the opportunity to build significantly upon one of our strongest industries by adding a large group of the leading attorneys in that field who are laser-focused on exceptional client service, we knew it was the right move. As a national firm, expanding our footprint to include New Jersey is exciting, and our growth will continue to be driven by adding the right talent who share our vision.' Baker Donelson's Health Law Group has long been among the ten largest health law practices in the country, with more than 200 attorneys in 11 states and the District of Columbia serving the health care industry. This move grows the practice and deepens the Firm's experience in a number of areas of health law. 'This is a tremendous addition to our health practice,' said Michaela D. Poizner, chair of Baker Donelson's Health Law and Public Policy Department. 'It not only builds on our existing national practice but also deepens our capabilities in areas we've been intently focused on expanding, including private equity transactions and payor-provider litigation. The dynamic combination also adds some of the country's top next-generation health care and litigation attorneys to our team, fortifying our role as trusted advisors to health care providers for decades to come.' Among the new shareholders are Gary W. Herschman, a seasoned health care transactions attorney with extensive experience handling major strategic transactions on both the buy-side and sell-side, and Anjana D. Patel, a highly regarded legal advisor who represents clients across the health care industry and related sectors in mergers and acquisitions, joint ventures and related transactions, and regulatory matters. With over 25 years of collaboration together on health care transactions, Mr. Herschman and Ms. Patel bring an unparalleled depth of knowledge and strategic insight to the Firm. Also joining as a shareholder is Anthony Argiropoulos, an accomplished national litigator. Mr. Argiropoulos has obtained hundreds of millions of dollars in awards and settlements for health care providers, including a widely reported $110 million win against a large health insurer on behalf of a national emergency care provider. He is known for his smart-aggressive approach to high stakes litigation, and he brings his entire team of litigators and professionals to Baker Donelson. Prior to joining Baker Donelson, Mr. Argiropoulos served as chair of the National Litigation Steering Committee at Epstein Becker Green. Mr. Herschman, who will serve as co-chair of Baker Donelson's Health Care Transactions Group, expressed enthusiasm about the move, stating, 'Beyond the immense value of joining Baker Donelson's premier health care practice, we are excited to be part of a full-service firm. Our clients will continue to receive top-tier health regulatory advice, and now will also have direct access to a deep bench of top-tier attorneys in critical areas such as securities, corporate and non-profit tax, health care bankruptcy, and private equity – enhancing our ability to support their evolving needs.' Ms. Patel, who will serve as managing shareholder of both the Metropark and Princeton offices, emphasized the strategic fit, adding, 'We have long admired Baker Donelson's outstanding national reputation in health care. The Firm's well-established foundation, sustained growth, clear strategic vision, and financial strength make it the ideal platform to expand our national practice and enhance the level of service and value we provide to our clients.' Mr. Argiropoulos added, 'Baker Donelson's energy, focus, and philosophy resonate with us. We see a world of synergies and benefits for Baker Donelson, for us, and for clients – a true win-win-win. We are proud to become part of Baker Donelson's history and its future as we plant its flag in New Jersey.' Attorneys Andrew Kaplan and Glenn P. Prives are also joining as shareholders. Mr. Kaplan, who served as managing shareholder of Epstein Becker Green's Princeton office, is a transactional attorney who practices extensively in the secured lending, real estate, and corporate fields. His experience includes representation of borrowers in all types of financing transactions; representation of buyers, sellers, lenders, developers, and borrowers in real estate transactions; and counseling emerging and established companies on mergers and acquisitions, joint ventures, and strategic alliances. Mr. Prives is a health care and corporate law attorney who represents health care clients on matters including hospital-physician alignment, private equity transactions, mergers and acquisitions, strategic transactions, joint ventures, and major affiliations. He is also highly experienced in health care regulatory matters, including the Stark Law, the Anti-Kickback Statute, fraud and abuse, HIPAA, Medicare and Medicaid issues, and compliance. Of the 26 new attorneys, 17 are joining as shareholders, two as of counsel, and seven as associates. Also joining are two paralegals and six support staff. All of these professionals are joining from the leading health law firm of Epstein Becker Green. In launching these new locations, Baker Donelson has established temporary office space in Metropark and Princeton, and will be securing permanent office space in the coming months. The attorneys joining, along with their practice areas and locations, are: Shareholders Of Counsel Associates Baker Donelson's growth in recent years has included expanding its presence in the Carolinas with new locations in Raleigh and Charlotte, North Carolina, and in Charleston, South Carolina. Baker Donelson is a national law firm with more than 700 attorneys and public policy advisors representing more than 30 practice areas to serve a wide range of legal needs. Clients receive knowledgeable guidance from experienced, multi-disciplined industry and client service teams, all seamlessly connected across more than 20 offices in Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Maryland, Mississippi, New Jersey, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, and Washington, D.C. View original content to download multimedia: SOURCE Baker Donelson
