In a decision that have global implications, a US federal appeals court ruled Friday that President Donald Trump unlawfully leaned on emergency powers to impose sweeping tariffs earlier this year.
“Because we agree that (the International Emergency Economic Powers Act’s) grant of presidential authority to ‘regulate’ imports does not authorize the tariffs imposed by the Executive Orders, we affirm,” the Federal Circuit said in an unsigned opinion upholding a lower-court ruling against Trump’s tariffs.
The court ruled that Congress, in passing the IEEPA, did not give the president “wide-ranging authority to impose tariffs of the nature of the Trafficking and Reciprocal Tariffs.”
“Notably, when drafting IEEPA, Congress did not use the term ‘tariff’ or any of its synonyms, like ‘duty’ or ‘tax,’” the court said in its majority ruling. “The absence of any such tariff language in IEEPA contrasts with statutes where Congress has affirmatively granted such power and included clear limits on that power.”
The case was heard by the full bench of the Federal Circuit. Seven of its judges ruled against Trump, while four dissented from the court’s decision.
Though the majority ruled that Trump exceeded his authority when he used the emergency law to impose the tariffs, it declined to block them outright. Instead, it sent a pair of challenges to the levies back to the lower court to take another look at whether it went too far when it blocked the tariffs on a nationwide basis.
A federal court ruled in May that Trump did not have the authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to impose sweeping tariffs. The Trump administration immediately appealed the decision, setting the course for a legal battle over the economic policy that Trump promises will re-focus the American economy on manufacturing, but could raise prices for small businesses and consumers.
A three-judge panel at the US Court of International Trade blocked all tariffs invoked under IEEPA, the “Liberation Day” tariffs Trump announced on April 2, and the tariffs placed earlier this year against China, Mexico and Canada that were designed to combat fentanyl coming into the United States. Notably, the order did not include the 25% tariffs on autos, auto parts, steel or aluminum, which were under a different law, Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act.
The panel unanimously came to a summary judgement on two separate cases in one opinion. One was a lawsuit was filed in April by the Liberty Justice Center, a libertarian legal advocacy group representing wine-seller VOS Selections and four other small businesses. The other was filed by 12 Democratic states against the government over tariffs.
The appeals court consolidated those two cases.
With CNN report
Leave a Reply