Latest News

The US Court of appeals rules that most Trump tariffs are illegal

The U.S. Court of Appeals ruled Friday that the majority of Donald Trump's tariffs were illegal. This decision undermines the Republican President's use the tariffs as an important tool for international economic policy.

In his second term as president, Trump has used tariffs to exert political pressure on countries that export goods into the U.S. and to renegotiate deals with trade partners.

Tariffs are a tool that Trump's administration can use to gain concessions from its trading partners, but they also increase volatility on the financial markets.

The U.S. Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit, in Washington, D.C., ruled on the legality of the "reciprocal tariffs" that Trump imposed during his April trade war, as well as a different set of tariffs imposed against China, Canada, and Mexico in February.

The decision of the court does not affect tariffs imposed under other legal authority such as Trump's tariffs against steel and aluminum imports.

It is expected that the case will be appealed before the U.S. Supreme Court.

Trump has justified his tariffs, as well as those more recent ones, under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. IEEPA allows the president to deal with "unusual or extraordinary" threats in times of national emergency.

Historically, the 1977 law was used to sanction enemies or freeze their assets. Trump, who is the first president to impose tariffs using IEEPA, claims that the measures are justified due to trade imbalances and the flow of drugs across borders.

The law doesn't mention tariffs but it does allow the president to respond to crises in a variety of ways. Trump's Department of Justice argues that emergency provisions in the law allow tariffs. These provisions authorize a President to "regulate or block" imports.

In April, Trump declared an emergency because the U.S. imports far more than they export. This has been the case for decades. Trump claimed that the U.S. trade deficit undermined manufacturing capabilities and military readiness. Trump claimed that the tariffs imposed in February against China, Canada, and Mexico were justified because these countries did not do enough to prevent illegal fentanyl crossing U.S. border. These countries deny this claim.

The court ruled in two cases. One was brought by five small U.S. companies and the second by 12 Democratic U.S. States, who argued that IEEPA doesn't authorize tariffs.

According to the lawsuits, Congress has the power to impose taxes and tariffs and that is not delegated to the president. Any delegation must be explicit and limited.

The U.S. Court of International Trade in New York ruled on Trump's tariff policy on May 28. It said that the president exceeded his authority by imposing both sets of tariffs. A judge appointed by Trump during his first term was part of the three-judge panel.

A court in Washington, D.C., ruled the IEEPA did not authorize Trump's Tariffs. The government appealed this decision. At least eight lawsuits, including one by the State of California, have been filed to challenge Trump's tariff policy. Dietrich Knauth, Dietrich Knauth and William Mallard contributed to the reporting.

(source: Reuters)