Court Blocks Trump’s ‘Liberation Day’ Tariffs, Cites Legal Overreach

Trump’s Tariffs Blocked by Court

Washington: In a major legal defeat for former President Donald Trump, a U.S. federal trade court has blocked his plan to add new tariffs on imports. The court said Trump went beyond the powers given to him by the Constitution.

A panel of three judges from the Court of International Trade in New York made the decision on Wednesday. They ruled that Trump’s plan to place tariffs on countries with trade surpluses—like China and the European Union—violated the law. The court said Trump misused the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), a law meant for dealing with national emergencies.

The Trump administration argued that trade imbalances were a threat to the United States. They said the tariffs were necessary to protect the country and claimed they were also helping to reduce tensions between India and Pakistan. Officials said the threat of tariffs helped stop a possible war after a terror attack in Kashmir in April. But India said Trump had nothing to do with calming the situation, and Pakistan asked India to stop its military response.

Highlights:

U.S. trade court struck down Trump’s ‘Liberation Day’ tariffs.
Judges ruled Trump exceeded his authority under the IEEPA law.
Court said only Congress can regulate international trade.
Lawsuits were filed by small businesses and 13 U.S. states.
Trump administration plans to appeal the court’s decision.

The administration also warned the court that blocking the tariffs could harm ongoing trade talks with countries like China. They said important agreements needed to be finalized by July 7.

However, the judges disagreed. They said the President does not have unlimited power to control trade and that only Congress has the authority to make trade laws.

“Congress didn’t give the President full control over trade under IEEPA,” the court said. “Only Congress can make laws about trade with other countries. Just calling something an emergency doesn’t change that.”

The judges also made it clear they were not judging whether tariffs were good or bad—they were only looking at whether they were legal. “We’re not saying tariffs are smart or not. We’re saying the law doesn’t allow the President to use them this way,” they wrote.

The court added that letting the President make trade rules without limits would be giving up Congress’s powers, which the Constitution doesn’t allow.

The decision came after two lawsuits were filed—one by a legal group representing small American businesses that depend on imports, and another by 13 U.S. states. The lawsuits said the tariffs would hurt businesses and raise costs, and that they were put in place without proper approval.

Even though the court ruled against him, Trump’s team quickly said they would appeal. This means the legal battle over the tariffs is not over.

Trump had first announced the tariffs on April 2, starting with a 10% duty on imports from several countries, including China. This caused problems in the financial markets, and the government had to pause some of the tariffs just days later.

On May 12, the administration announced that it would lower the biggest tariffs on China while trying to make a larger trade deal. Both the U.S. and China agreed to reduce some of the tariffs for 90 days.

After the court ruling, White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller posted on social media that the courts had too much power. He called it a “judicial coup.”

https://theeasterntimes.com/stress-management-3-simple-steps/