Trump Tariffs Struck Down In Court For Second Time
A second federal court ruled President Donald Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariffs are unlawful, issuing an order Thursday and delivering another blow to the Trump administration just hours after a federal trade court struck the tariffs down Wednesday night.
President Donald Trump displays a signed executive order imposing tariffs on April 2, in Washington, ... More DC.
Getty ImagesJudge Rudolph Contreras ruled Trump’s executive orders on his “Liberation Day” tariffs are unlawful and partially blocked them while litigation against the tariffs moves forward, also denying the Trump administration’s request to have the case moved from federal district court in Washington, D.C. to the Court of International Trade.
The ruling is more narrow than the sweeping decision issued Wednesday night by the Court of International Trade, as Contreras only blocked the Trump administration from levying tariffs on the specific businesses that brought the lawsuit, while Wednesday’s ruling unilaterally blocked the Trump administration from levying any tariffs on imported goods under the “Liberation Day” orders.
The International Economic Emergency Powers Act (IEEPA), which Trump used to justify his sweeping tariffs on foreign goods, “does not authorize the President to impose the tariffs set forth” in his April 2 executive orders, Contreras ruled.
While Contreras’ ruling doesn’t have much of an immediate effect given that the Court of International Trade already blocked Trump’s tariffs, it’s a further legal blow to Trump’s tariff agenda and protects the plaintiffs in this lawsuit, ensuring they will not have to pay tariffs even if an appeals court were to pause or overturn the Court of International Trade’s ruling.
Trump has not personally weighed in on the tariff rulings yet, and the White House has not yet commented on Contreras’ ruling. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt blasted the Court of International Trade’s ruling in a press conference Thursday, claiming Trump’s tariffs are “legally sound and grounded in common sense” and the three-judge panel—which included a Trump appointee”—“brazenly abused their judicial power to usurp the authority of President Trump.”
Trump has already appealed Wednesday’s tariff ruling from the Court of International Trade, and is likely to appeal this decision as well. That means that an appeals court could still decide to put the tariffs back in effect in either case. The dispute is expected to move swiftly to the Supreme Court, as the Trump administration said in a court filing Thursday that it intends to ask the high court to take up the Court of International Trade case on Friday if it isn’t allowed sooner to keep the tariffs in effect. It’s unclear how justices could rule in the case, and when any ruling from the Supreme Court could come.
Both Conteras’ ruling and the Court of International Trade’s decision both say Trump’s tariffs are unlawful because IEEPA doesn’t allow him to impose sweeping tariffs. That raises the likelihood that Trump will try to impose tariffs under a different provision of federal law, which are more explicit about allowing presidents to impose tariffs, but are more limited in scope or require a lengthy process to impose them. Section 232 of the Trade Act of 1974 allows presidents to impose tariffs only on certain sectors after following an administrative process, for instance, while Section 301 of that law allows tariffs on foreign countries, but also only after administration officials conduct an investigation. Other provisions could be more immediate, like Section 122 of the Trade Act, but that only allows tariffs of up to 15% for 150 days, after which Congress would need to approve any extensions.
There are still more lawsuits pending over Trump’s tariffs that could result in further rulings to striking them down, such as a lawsuit brought by the state of California. While the pending lawsuits aren’t likely to have a huge impact immediately, given the Court of International Trade has already halted the tariffs from staying in effect, they could prove important if that ruling eventually gets overturned, or if there end up being conflicting court rulings that ultimately have to be resolved by the Supreme Court.
Trump imposed tariffs on nearly all countries on April 2—deemed “Liberation Day”—delivering on his longtime promise to implement sweeping tariffs despite warnings from economists that doing so could raise prices for consumers and harm the economy. Though Trump later paused the worst of his tariffs for 90 days, while leaving a baseline 10% tariff in place, the tariffs have remained controversial and roiled global markets. The Court of International Trade became the first court to weigh in on the tariffs on Wednesday, striking down Trump’s tariffs as unlawful despite previously declining to immediately put the tariffs on hold while it was deliberating. “Any interpretation of IEEPA that delegates unlimited tariff authority is unconstitutional,” the judges ruled.
ForbesCould Trump’s Tariffs Be Reinstated? What To Know After Court Strikes Them Down
ForbesTrump’s ‘Liberation Day’ Tariffs Struck Down In Court—U.S. Stock Futures SurgeBy Alison Durkee
