logo
What happens now that a US court has blocked most of Trump's import tariffs?

What happens now that a US court has blocked most of Trump's import tariffs?

The Journal29-05-2025
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.'
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Russia issues missile warning to West ahead of US deadline for Ukraine ceasefire
Russia issues missile warning to West ahead of US deadline for Ukraine ceasefire

Irish Times

time19 minutes ago

  • Irish Times

Russia issues missile warning to West ahead of US deadline for Ukraine ceasefire

The Kremlin has said it is no longer bound by any constraints on deploying short- and intermediate-range missiles near European Union and Nato states, as nuclear sabre-rattling escalated before a US deadline for Moscow to halt fighting with Ukraine . US president Donald Trump has threatened to impose 'severe' tariffs on imports from Russia and from countries – including China and India – that buy Moscow's oil, unless the Kremlin agrees to a ceasefire by Friday. Envoys for Mr Trump are expected in Moscow and Kyiv this week – Russian state media say Steve Witkoff will arrive on Wednesday, and Keith Kellogg is set to visit Ukraine – amid sharpening rhetoric between the White House and the Kremlin. After former Russian president Dmitry Medvedev warned that Mr Trump's 'ultimatum game' was stoking the risk of war between their countries, the US leader said last Friday that he was moving two nuclear-powered submarines to 'appropriate regions, just in case these foolish and inflammatory statements are more than just that'. READ MORE On the same day, Russia said it had started regular production of a new nuclear-capable, intermediate-range ballistic missile called Oreshnik, and would deploy it this year in neighbouring Belarus, which borders Ukraine and EU and Nato members Poland, Lithuania and Latvia. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov confirmed on Tuesday that Moscow now felt free to deploy short- and mid-range missiles wherever it liked, in response to what it claims are US plans to deploy such missiles in areas of Europe and Asia that would threaten Russia. [ Opinion: Trump's threats against Russia are a charade meant to buy Putin time Opens in new window ] 'Russia no longer has any constraints in this regard. Russia no longer considers itself to be limited in any way. Russia considers itself to have the right, if necessary, to take appropriate measures,' he said. During Mr Trump's first term as president in 2019, the US withdrew from the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF), which banned missiles with a range of 500-5,500km. Russia denied US claims at the time that it was secretly developing such weapons, but said it would not deploy anything that had been banned under the INF for as long as the US and its allies did the same. 'Our repeated warnings on this account have been ignored, and US-made ground-based INF systems are being deployed in Europe and the Asia-Pacific,' the Russian foreign ministry said on Monday. 'In this regard, [Russia] states that the conditions for maintaining a unilateral moratorium on the deployment of similar systems have ceased to exist. We are authorised to declare that the Russian Federation no longer considers itself bound by the previously adopted self-imposed restrictions.' Moscow claimed that some versions of the US-made Himars rocket system – which Ukraine uses to powerful effect against Russia's invasion force – could fire further than 500km and so fall 'into the category of ground-launched INF-range missile systems'. Mr Trump reiterated on Tuesday that he would raise tariffs on India 'very substantially' due to what he considers to be New Delhi's unfair trade rules and because it is 'fuelling the war machine' by buying Russian oil. [ The Irish Times view on Trump and Putin: the dangerous nuclear backdrop Opens in new window ] He also claimed that lower world energy prices would force Russian president Vladimir Putin to end his invasion of Ukraine. 'If energy goes down enough, Putin is going to stop killing people,' Mr Trump told US television. 'If you get energy down, another $10 a barrel, he's going to have no choice because his economy stinks.' Mr Peskov said US threats to impose financial penalties on Russia's trading partners were 'illegal'. Sweden, Norway and Denmark announced that they would contribute about $500 million (€433 million) to a new plan for Nato members in Europe to buy US arms for Ukraine. The Netherlands said on Monday it would put €500 million into the scheme.

Rwanda agrees to take deportees from the US after migrant deal with UK collapsed
Rwanda agrees to take deportees from the US after migrant deal with UK collapsed

Irish Examiner

timean hour ago

  • Irish Examiner

Rwanda agrees to take deportees from the US after migrant deal with UK collapsed

Rwanda on Tuesday became the third African nation to agree to accept deportees from the United States under the Trump administration's plans to send migrants to countries they have no ties with to get them off American soil. Rwandan government spokeswoman Yolande Makolo told The Associated Press in a statement that the East African country would accept up to 250 deportees from the US, with 'the ability to approve each individual proposed for resettlement' under the agreement. Ms Makolo did not provide a timeline for any deportees to arrive in Rwanda or say if they would arrive at once or in several batches. She said details were still being worked out. The US sent 13 men it described as dangerous criminals who were in the US illegally to South Sudan and Eswatini in Africa last month and has said it is seeking more agreements with African nations. It said those deportees' home countries refused to take them back. Those approved (for resettlement in Rwanda) will be provided with workforce training, healthcare and accommodation support to jumpstart their lives in Rwanda, giving them the opportunity to contribute to one of the fastest-growing economies in the world over the last decade The US has also deported hundreds of Venezuelans and others to Costa Rica, El Salvador and Panama under President Donald Trump's plans to expel people who he says entered the US illegally and are 'the worst of the worst'. Rwanda attracted international attention and some outrage when it struck a deal in 2022 with the UK to accept migrants who had arrived in the UK to seek asylum. Under that proposed deal, their claims would have been processed in Rwanda and, if successful, they would have stayed there. The contentious agreement was criticised by rights groups and others as being unethical and unworkable and was ultimately scrapped when Britain's new Labour government took over. Britain's Supreme Court ruled in 2023 that the deal was unlawful because Rwanda was not a safe third country for migrants. The Trump administration has come under scrutiny for the African countries it has entered into secretive deals with to take deportees. It sent eight men from South Sudan, Cuba, Laos, Mexico, Myanmar and Vietnam to South Sudan in early July after a US Supreme Court ruling cleared the way for their deportations. They were held for weeks in a converted shipping container at an American military base in Djibouti as the legal battle over their deportations played out. South Sudan, which is tipping towards civil war, has declined to say where the men are being held or what their fate is. The US also deported five men who are citizens of Vietnam, Jamaica, Cuba, Yemen and Laos to the southern African kingdom of Eswatini, where the government said they will be held in solitary confinement in prison for an undetermined period of time. A human rights lawyer in Eswatini said the men are being denied access to legal representation there and has taken authorities to court. Eswatini is Africa's last absolute monarchy. The king rules over government and political parties are effectively banned. Both South Sudan and Eswatini have declined to give details of their agreements with the US. Rwanda, a country of some 15 million people, has long stood out on the continent for its recovery from a genocide that killed more than 800,000 people in 1994. It has promoted itself under long-time President Paul Kagame as an example of stability and development, but human rights groups allege there are also deadly crackdowns on any perceived dissent against Mr Kagame, who has been president for 25 years. This agreement enhances Rwanda's strategic interest of having good relationships with the Trump administration Government spokesperson Ms Makolo said the agreement with the US was Rwanda doing its part to help with international migration issues because 'our societal values are founded on reintegration and rehabilitation'. 'Those approved (for resettlement in Rwanda) will be provided with workforce training, healthcare and accommodation support to jumpstart their lives in Rwanda, giving them the opportunity to contribute to one of the fastest-growing economies in the world over the last decade,' she said. There were no details about whether Rwanda had received anything in return for taking the deportees. Gonzaga Muganwa, a Rwandan political analyst, said 'appeasing President Trump pays'. 'This agreement enhances Rwanda's strategic interest of having good relationships with the Trump administration,' he said.

Megan O'Brien: Diageo shares rose 7% after its latest results - it's too early to toast a recovery
Megan O'Brien: Diageo shares rose 7% after its latest results - it's too early to toast a recovery

Business Post

timean hour ago

  • Business Post

Megan O'Brien: Diageo shares rose 7% after its latest results - it's too early to toast a recovery

Business Post subscribers can read: • What Diageo's new interim CEO had to say about $200m in Trump tariffs — and how they plan to cushion the blow • How alcohol-free brands like Guinness 0.0 and Captain Morgan 0.0 are quietly driving double-digit growth • Why the promise of a new CEO by October gave investors a rare shot of confidence Shares in drinks giant Diageo rose almost 7 per cent on Tuesday morning. It's worth noting the gain was the Guinness-owner's biggest rally - on ...

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