Latest news with #DietrichKnauth
Yahoo
a day ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
Judge blocks Trump administration's effort to eliminate Job Corps
By Dietrich Knauth NEW YORK (Reuters) -A U.S. judge on Wednesday temporarily stopped the Trump administration from moving ahead with an effort to eliminate the Job Corps, the largest U.S. job training program for low-income youth. U.S. District Judge Andrew Carter in Manhattan issued a temporary restraining order in a lawsuit filed by a trade group representing contractors that operate Job Corps centers. Carter ordered the government not to terminate Job Corps contractors or stop work at Job Corps centers until a further ruling in the case, and he ordered the Labor Department to appear at a court hearing on June 17. The lawsuit alleges that the U.S. Department of Labor is violating federal law and its own regulations by abruptly shuttering the program, a plan the agency announced last week. Job Corps was created by Congress in 1964 and allows 16-to-24-year-olds from disadvantaged backgrounds to obtain high school diplomas or an equivalent, vocational certificates and licenses and on-the-job training. The program currently serves about 25,000 people at 120 Job Corps centers run by contractors. The Labor Department in announcing the end of the program said it was not cost effective, had a low graduation rate and was not placing participants in stable jobs. The department also said there had been thousands of instances of violence, drug use and security breaches at Job Corps centers. The National Job Corps Association and other plaintiffs in Tuesday's lawsuit said the Labor Department does not have the power to dismantle a program established and funded by Congress. Shuttering Job Corps is a small piece of a broader effort by Trump, a Republican, and his appointees to drastically shrink the federal bureaucracy, including by getting rid of some offices and agencies altogether.
Yahoo
4 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Trump administration seeks pause of second tariff case after loss
By Dietrich Knauth NEW YORK (Reuters) -The Trump administration on Monday asked a U.S. appeals court to pause a second court ruling that found the president had exceeded his authority by imposing sweeping tariffs on imports, saying the decision jeopardizes trade negotiations with other nations. Trump's tariffs were first declared illegal by the Manhattan-based U.S. Court of International Trade on May 28. A federal court in Washington, D.C. followed with a second ruling the next day, which also found that the tariffs exceeded the president's authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, a law intended to address "unusual and extraordinary" threats during national emergencies. The lawsuits which led to those rulings challenged Trump's use of the law to justify the so-called "Liberation Day" tariffs on imports imposed in early April on most U.S trading partners, as well as a separate set of tariffs levied on China, Mexico and Canada in February. The latter are related to his accusation that the three countries were facilitating the flow of fentanyl into the U.S., allegations the countries deny. The Trump administration has already won a temporary pause of the first court loss, allowing it to reinstate tariffs during the early stages of the appeal. The court is expected to rule on the Trump administration's request for a longer-term pause later this month. The second ruling, from U.S. District Judge Rudolph Contreras had less immediate impact than the Court of International Trade ruling, because it only stopped the Trump administration from collecting tariffs from two small businesses that had sued whereas the trade court ruling blocked the tariffs that had been challenged broadly. But it contained a more direct finding that IEEPA simply does not authorize tariffs, going further than the more nuanced ruling in the Court of International Trade. A blunt ruling that IEEPA does not authorize tariffs undercuts Trump's ability to use tariffs as a 'credible threat' in trade talks, the Department of Justice wrote in an emergency motion to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C Circuit, which has jurisdiction over the D.C. district court. Four senior Trump officials, including U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio and U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Lee Greer had submitted affidavits to Contreras before his May 29 ruling, saying that stopping the tariffs would threaten the United States' economic and national security by jeopardizing 'delicate' trade negotiations with dozens of other nations. The small businesses that brought the lawsuit, educational toy makers Learning Resources Inc and hand2mind, said they would oppose the Trump administration's attempt to block the lower court ruling.
Yahoo
4 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Trump administration seeks pause of second tariff case after loss
By Dietrich Knauth NEW YORK (Reuters) -The Trump administration on Monday asked a U.S. appeals court to pause a second court ruling that found the president had exceeded his authority by imposing sweeping tariffs on imports, saying the decision jeopardizes trade negotiations with other nations. Trump's tariffs were first declared illegal by the Manhattan-based U.S. Court of International Trade on May 28. A federal court in Washington, D.C. followed with a second ruling the next day, which also found that the tariffs exceeded the president's authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, a law intended to address "unusual and extraordinary" threats during national emergencies. The lawsuits which led to those rulings challenged Trump's use of the law to justify the so-called "Liberation Day" tariffs on imports imposed in early April on most U.S trading partners, as well as a separate set of tariffs levied on China, Mexico and Canada in February. The latter are related to his accusation that the three countries were facilitating the flow of fentanyl into the U.S., allegations the countries deny. The Trump administration has already won a temporary pause of the first court loss, allowing it to reinstate tariffs during the early stages of the appeal. The court is expected to rule on the Trump administration's request for a longer-term pause later this month. The second ruling, from U.S. District Judge Rudolph Contreras had less immediate impact than the Court of International Trade ruling, because it only stopped the Trump administration from collecting tariffs from two small businesses that had sued whereas the trade court ruling blocked the tariffs that had been challenged broadly. But it contained a more direct finding that IEEPA simply does not authorize tariffs, going further than the more nuanced ruling in the Court of International Trade. A blunt ruling that IEEPA does not authorize tariffs undercuts Trump's ability to use tariffs as a 'credible threat' in trade talks, the Department of Justice wrote in an emergency motion to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C Circuit, which has jurisdiction over the D.C. district court. Four senior Trump officials, including U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio and U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Lee Greer had submitted affidavits to Contreras before his May 29 ruling, saying that stopping the tariffs would threaten the United States' economic and national security by jeopardizing 'delicate' trade negotiations with dozens of other nations. The small businesses that brought the lawsuit, educational toy makers Learning Resources Inc and hand2mind, said they would oppose the Trump administration's attempt to block the lower court ruling.
Daily Maverick
29-05-2025
- Business
- Daily Maverick
US court blocks most Trump tariffs, says president exceeded his authority
Court cites that Constitution grants Congress power to regulate international commerce Markets cheer ruling, dollar and global stocks rally Trump administration files notice of appeal, questions authority of the court By Dietrich Knauth and Daniel Wiessner NEW YORK, May 28 (Reuters) – A US trade court blocked President Donald Trump's tariffs from going into effect in a sweeping ruling on Wednesday that found the president overstepped his authority by imposing across-the-board duties on imports from US trading partners. The Court of International Trade said the US Constitution gives Congress exclusive authority to regulate commerce with other countries that is not overridden by the president's emergency powers to safeguard the U.S. economy. 'The court does not pass upon the wisdom or likely effectiveness of the President's use of tariffs as leverage,' a three-judge panel said in the decision to issue a permanent injunction on the blanket tariff orders issued by Trump since January. 'That use is impermissible not because it is unwise or ineffective, but because [federal law] does not allow it.' The judges also ordered the Trump administration to issue new orders reflecting the permanent injunction within 10 days. The Trump administration minutes later filed a notice of appeal and questioned the authority of the court. The court invalidated with immediate effect all of Trump's orders on tariffs since January that were rooted in the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), a law meant to address 'unusual and extraordinary' threats during a national emergency. The court was not asked to address some industry-specific tariffs Trump has issued on automobiles, steel and aluminum, using a different statute. The decisions of the Manhattan-based Court of International Trade, which hears disputes involving international trade and customs laws, can be appealed to the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington, D.C., and ultimately the US Supreme Court. TRADE TURMOIL Trump has made charging US importers tariffs on goods from foreign countries the central policy of his ongoing trade wars, which have severely disrupted global trade flows and roiled financial markets. Companies of all sizes have been whipsawed by Trump's swift imposition of tariffs and sudden reversals as they seek to manage supply chains, production, staffing and prices. A White House spokesperson on Wednesday said US trade deficits with other countries constituted 'a national emergency that has decimated American communities, left our workers behind, and weakened our defense industrial base – facts that the court did not dispute.' 'It is not for unelected judges to decide how to properly address a national emergency,' Kush Desai, the spokesperson, said in a statement. Financial markets cheered the ruling. The US dollar rallied following the court's order, surging against currencies such as the euro, yen and the Swiss franc in particular. Wall Street futures rose and equities across Asia also rose. The ruling, if it stands, blows a giant hole through Trump's strategy to use steep tariffs to wring concessions from trading partners. It creates deep uncertainty around multiple simultaneous negotiations with the European Union, China and many other countries. Trump has promised Americans that the tariffs would draw manufacturing jobs back to US shores and shrink a $1.2 trillion US goods trade deficit, which were among his central campaign promises. Without the instant leverage provided by tariffs of 10% to 54% or higher, the Trump administration would have to find new forms of leverage or take a slower approach to negotiations with trading partners. BUSINESSES HURTING The ruling came in a pair of lawsuits, one filed by the nonpartisan Liberty Justice Center on behalf of five small US businesses that import goods from countries targeted by the duties and the other by 12 U.S. states. The companies, which range from a New York wine and spirits importer to a Virginia-based maker of educational kits and musical instruments, have said the tariffs will hurt their ability to do business. 'There is no question here of narrowly tailored relief; if the challenged Tariff Orders are unlawful as to Plaintiffs they are unlawful as to all,' the judges wrote in their decision. At least five other legal challenges to the tariffs are pending. Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield, a Democrat whose office is leading the states' lawsuit, called Trump's tariffs unlawful, reckless and economically devastating. 'This ruling reaffirms that our laws matter, and that trade decisions can't be made on the president's whim,' Rayfield said in a statement. Trump has claimed broad authority to set tariffs under IEEPA. The law has historically been used to impose sanctions on enemies of the US or freeze their assets. Trump is the first US president to use it to impose tariffs. The Justice Department has said the lawsuits should be dismissed because the plaintiffs have not been harmed by tariffs that they have not yet paid, and because only Congress, not private businesses, can challenge a national emergency declared by the president under IEEPA. In imposing the tariffs in early April, Trump called the trade deficit a national emergency that justified his 10% across-the-board tariff on all imports, with higher rates for countries with which the United States has the largest trade deficits, particularly China. Many of those country-specific tariffs were paused a week later. The Trump administration on May 12 said it was also temporarily reducing the steepest tariffs on China while working on a longer-term trade deal. Both countries agreed to cut tariffs on each other for at least 90 days. (Reporting by Dietrich Knauth and Daniel Wiessner; Additional reporting by Alexia Garamfalvi, David Lawder, Jasper Ward, Dan Burns and Jonathan Allen; writing by Jonathan Allen; editing by Sandra Maler, Paul Thomasch, Leslie Adler and Lincoln Feast.)
Yahoo
29-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
US trade court blocks Trump's tariffs
By Dietrich Knauth and Daniel Wiessner NEW YORK (Reuters) -A U.S. trade court on Wednesday blocked President Donald Trump's tariffs from going into effect, ruling that the president overstepped his authority by imposing across-the-board duties on imports from nations that sell more to the United States than they buy. The Manhattan-based Court of International Trade said the U.S. Constitution gives Congress exclusive authority to regulate commerce with other countries that is not overridden by the president's emergency powers to safeguard the U.S. economy. "The court does not pass upon the wisdom or likely effectiveness of the President's use of tariffs as leverage. That use is impermissible not because it is unwise or ineffective, but because [federal law] does not allow it," a three-judge panel said in the decision. The Trump administration minutes later filed a notice of appeal. The ruling came in a pair of lawsuits, one filed by the nonpartisan Liberty Justice Center on behalf of five small U.S. businesses that import goods from countries targeted by the duties and the other by 13 U.S. states. The companies, which range from a New York wine and spirits importer to a Virginia-based maker of educational kits and musical instruments, have said the tariffs will hurt their ability to do business. The White House and lawyers for groups that sued did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Stephen Miller, a White House deputy chief of staff and one of Trump's lead policy advisers, rebuked the court in a brief social media post, writing: "The judicial coup is out of control." At least five other legal challenges to the tariffs are pending. Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield, a Democrat whose office is leading the states' lawsuit, called Trump's tariffs unlawful, reckless and economically devastating. "This ruling reaffirms that our laws matter, and that trade decisions can't be made on the president's whim," Rayfield said in a statement. Trump has claimed broad authority to set tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), which is meant to address "unusual and extraordinary" threats during a national emergency. The law has historically been used to impose sanctions on enemies of the U.S. or freeze their assets. Trump is the first U.S. president to use it to impose tariffs. The Justice Department has said the lawsuits should be dismissed because the plaintiffs have not been harmed by tariffs that they have not yet paid, and because only Congress, not private businesses, can challenge a national emergency declared by the president under IEEPA. In imposing the tariffs in early April, Trump called the trade deficit a national emergency that justified his 10% across-the-board tariff on all imports, with higher rates for countries with which the United States has the largest trade deficits, particularly China. Many of those country-specific tariffs were paused a week later. The Trump administration on May 12 said it was also temporarily reducing the steepest tariffs on China while working on a longer-term trade deal. Both countries agreed to cut tariffs on each other for at least 90 days. Trump's on-and-off-again tariffs, which he has said are intended to restore U.S. manufacturing capability, have shocked U.S. financial markets. The U.S. dollar rose against both the Swiss franc, a traditional currency safe-haven, and the Japanese yen following the court decision. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
