Federal Circuit Rules Majority of Trump Tariffs Illegal

The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has ruled that a majority of the global tariff policies implemented by the were illegal. The court stated that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) did not explicitly grant the President the authority to impose tariffs. This decision, which was upheld by a 7-4 vote, maintained an earlier ruling by the U.S. Court of International Trade. The court emphasized that the tariffs lacked a direct connection to the declared "national emergency" and that the President's actions exceeded his constitutional authority.

The ruling, however, will not take effect until October 14, providing the 's team with a window to appeal to the Supreme Court. This delay allows for the continuation of the tariffs, which were imposed under various legal frameworks, including Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act, which authorizes tariffs on aluminum and steel. The court specifically mentioned tariffs imposed on countries like China and Canada under the pretext of combating fentanyl imports, stating that such broad tariffs lacked congressional authorization.

The responded swiftly on social media, asserting that all tariffs remain in effect and criticizing the court's decision as politically motivated. He argued that the tariffs are essential for protecting American workers and manufacturing, and that their removal would devastate the U.S. economy. He expressed confidence that the Supreme Court would ultimately uphold the tariffs, ensuring they serve the nation's interests and restore its economic strength.

The legal battle over these tariffs began in May when the U.S. Court of International Trade ruled that the tariffs violated the Constitution by exceeding the President's emergency powers. The court in New York emphasized that the Constitution grants Congress exclusive authority over foreign trade, and that the President's emergency powers cannot override congressional authority. The 's administration subsequently appealed this decision to the Federal Circuit.

If the Supreme Court upholds the Federal Circuit's ruling, the U.S. government may be required to refund hundreds of billions of dollars in tariffs. This prospect has raised concerns among economists, who worry about the potential economic impact. For the , this legal challenge is seen as another chapter in his broader economic strategy aimed at making the U.S. great again.

In response to the court's decision, the White House and the have taken a firm stance. The White House spokesperson stated that the President had legally exercised the tariff powers granted by Congress to safeguard the nation's and economy's security from foreign threats. The spokesperson also confirmed that the President's tariffs would remain in effect and expressed optimism about achieving a final victory in this matter. The , on the other hand, emphasized on social media that he would continue to use these tariffs to benefit the nation with the help of the Supreme Court.

The core of the court's decision revolves around the boundaries of presidential power. The majority opinion of the U.S. Federal Circuit Court of Appeals determined that the President's use of the IEEPA to impose tariffs exceeded his authority. This law, enacted in 1977, was originally intended to address economic threats during national emergencies. The court provided a grace period for these tariff measures, allowing them to remain in effect until October 14. This enables the U.S. government to appeal to the Supreme Court. Consequently, these tariff measures will continue to impact trade partners until the Supreme Court makes a final decision.

The Supreme Court's decision on whether to hear this case and the potential timeline for its review will be crucial in determining the ultimate fate of these tariff measures. The continuation of these tariffs will depend on the Supreme Court's final ruling, which will have significant implications for U.S. trade policy and its relationships with other countries.