All the Trump tariffs are, apparently, illegal and rescinded.
The question in the two cases before the court is whether the
International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977 (“IEEPA”) delegates these powers to the
President in the form of authority to impose unlimited tariffs on goods from nearly every country
in the world. The court does not read IEEPA to confer such unbounded authority and sets aside
the challenged tariffs imposed thereunder.
How long that’s going to stand is another thing….
The willingness or otherwise of SCOTUS to rule that the co-equal legislative branch of government does not mean any one of several hundred federal district judges imposing nationwide injunctions on literally anything they don’t like seems to be being kicked further and further down the road.
The much vaunted “conservative” Justices Gorsuch, Kavanagh and particularly Barrett have proved to be anything but.
I admit in this case it’s actually the previously little known Court of International Trade (based in New York, what a surprise) that’s asserting itself but the principal remains the same.
Not rescinded – enjoined. Stopped unless someone appeals and the appeals court disagrees.
Something like 90% of every ruling against Trump has been getting overturned on appeal. Typically they find that the majority of what Trump is doing is within his authority but some part of it isn’t so he can’t do that part.
How does the appeal system work in the US for federal courts ?
Reading newspaper stories it seems that appeals are heard by the same judge. Which is marking their own homework.
If American conservatives were not so generally peaceable and law-abiding there would be a full-scale civil war there right now.
Cities burned because a black criminal with a record of shoving loaded handguns into the bellies of pregnant women died of a fentanyl overdose while being restrained by a cop in the manner in which the cop had been trained.
I wonder if the traditional northern European high trust character, coupled with a hitherto relatively uncorrupted law enforcement, judicial and political order, and our enthusiasm for killing off bad lads over the centuries via execution (and getting higher testosterone males killed in various wars), has left us uniquely vulnerable to this moment?
If I were Trump I would pay a court to determine that the tariffs were illegal, void and of no effect, purely to get out of that fiasco with minimum loss of face.
Next I would ask the captain of the Mexican sailboat that crashed into the bridge if he had an undamaged yardarm to hang Peter Navarro from.
An odd choice of title. Do you find an ything to object to in the decision?
I think we have been heading to the supreme court for some time
Their decision will finally determine the outcome of Trump’s war on the Deep State
Personally I thing Trump will win
Declaring a national emergency is the key
I’m a yuge supporter of President Trump, but I’ve been amazed at how extensive he has assumed the power of the Presidency to be. Tariffs, in particular, struck me as something a President wouldn’t be able to unilaterally impose (whether you like them or not).
On the other hand, we learned about 4 years ago that if you say the magic word “emergency”, apparently politicians and bureaucrats can do damn near anything.
I doubt if Pres Trump is too worried about all the injunctions. The Dumbocrat judges seem to have forgotten about the mid-term elections to Congress and are providing voters with an endless supply of reasons to vote GOP. The electorate is MUCH more powerful than the Supreme Court.
An odd choice of title.
It’s not odd at all; it’s entirely predictable and appropriate.
. . . and are providing voters with an endless supply of reasons to vote GOP.
Perhaps, but unfortunately the GOP in Congress are providing zero reasons.
It’s an interesting matter of jurisprudence that lawless judges rarely recidivate after they’ve been burnt at the stake or had a gallon of molten hot gold poured down their throats.
Since nonce judges have set themselves up as the enemy of democracy, the rule of law and our civilisation, I urge President Trump to consider the traditional remedies for such robed parasites, which are extremely effective and cheap.
Ideally, we want to fuck the legal profession so hard that they love us. We can start by making it a lot more difficult for lawyers to make money. They’re a parasitic drag on the legitimate economy that makes everything worse, so there’s no reason why we should tolerate their ambulance chasing antics any longer. 100% tax on the legal profession, please.
Law should be something Mums can do as a part time job with the assistance of AI, earning a salary to match. We don’t need an expensive dedicated priestly caste of fifth columnists at all.
Related:
A Pakistani drug dealer has been allowed to remain in the UK because of his role in talking to his son about Islam and his culture.
The Home Office ordered the deportation of Muhammad Asif Karim, 43, after he amassed seven convictions for a total of 21 offences, including supplying the class A drugs heroin and cocaine, for which he served a four-year jail sentence.
He won his appeal against his removal after arguing that it would breach his rights to a family life under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).
An upper tribunal accepted it would be “unduly harsh” on his son if he was to be deported to Pakistan, even though his child was being “largely brought up by his white British mother”.
The son gave evidence to the immigration court that his father “is able to talk to him about Islam, about Pakistani culture and his own upbringing”.
Why are we paying these judges, and why haven’t they been arrested yet?
The son gave evidence to the immigration court that his father “is able to talk to him about Islam, about Pakistani culture and his own upbringing”.
He quite at liberty to go and live with his father and get first hand experience of Pakistan’s culture.
“is able to talk to him about Islam, about Pakistani culture and his own upbringing”.
I had imagined that the majority of schools would address this urgent need having decolonised their curricula to dispense with waycist British culture and history.
I would expect it will stand. Congress holds the power to “regulate Commerce with foreign Nations,”, which is exactly what tariffs are. Congress does not hold the power to amend the constitution, so Congress cannot grant a general delegation of its power as that would frustrate the limit imposed by the Constitution reserving that power to Congress.
Trump’s assertion that there is an emergency is completely bogus. The situation hos not suddenly changed and there is no need for temporary measures to be imposed to prevent harm while Congress debates and decides what to do.
And the USA does not have a constitution whereby it elects a dictator for four years who can do what they want – the president’s powers and duties are limited. Anyone who thinks that the president should have more power should be campaigning for amendment to or overthrow of the constitution – not whinging about judges.
Charles – Trump’s assertion that there is an emergency is completely bogus
If having suffered the largest invasion in human history combined with the biggest debt bomb in human history isn’t an emergency…
Anyway, I think you, and nonce judges will find that the President does get to decide what constitutes an emergency.
Anyone who thinks that the president should have more power should be campaigning for amendment to or overthrow of the constitution – not whinging about judges.
I think he should have the power to defenestrate judges. It works in Russia.
It’s nonce judges who have shredded the US Constitution, by declaring that the government isn’t allowed to govern and therefore the electorate isn’t allowed to choose their own government or derogate in any way from the preferences of nonce judges.
Only a worm would find this a satisfactory arrangement, men can’t live like this.
>Ottokring
May 29, 2025 at 6:53 am
How does the appeal system work in the US for federal courts ?
Reading newspaper stories it seems that appeals are heard by the same judge. Which is marking their own homework.
They’re not. There’s a whole separate appellate court system with different, better, judges. That doesn’t mean a case might not get sent back for rejudgement (this time taking note of the issues with the original judgement laid out by the appellate).
But its amazing how the same few *district* judges kept ‘randomly’ getting Trump cases and always decided that a nationwide injunction was necessary because a preliminary review has them thinking the plaintiffs will win.
>Esteban
May 29, 2025 at 11:10 am
I’m a yuge supporter of President Trump, but I’ve been amazed at how extensive he has assumed the power of the Presidency to be. Tariffs, in particular, struck me as something a President wouldn’t be able to unilaterally impose (whether you like them or not).
On the other hand, we learned about 4 years ago that if you say the magic word “emergency”, apparently politicians and bureaucrats can do damn near anything.
You’d think that – but Congress has delegated a ton of its responsibility over to the Executive. The ‘Imperial Presidency’ really isn’t so much Presidents taking power as it is Congress giving their power to the President.
Charles
May 29, 2025 at 8:18 pm
I would expect it will stand. Congress holds the power to “regulate Commerce with foreign Nations,”, which is exactly what tariffs are. Congress does not hold the power to amend the constitution, so Congress cannot grant a general delegation of its power as that would frustrate the limit imposed by the Constitution reserving that power to Congress.
Trump’s assertion that there is an emergency is completely bogus. The situation hos not suddenly changed and there is no need for temporary measures to be imposed to prevent harm while Congress debates and decides what to do.
1. Congress can not do a ‘general delegation’ but they can (and have) effectively delegated *specific* powers.
2. It doesn’t matter if the emergency is bogus. What matters is ‘do you or do you not have the power to declare an emergency’. There is no clause there specifying that the emergency be real or what constitutes an emergency. That’s one of the ways Congress has delegated power.
– Congress does not hold the power to amend the constitution . . .
It does, subject to ratification by the states (three quarters required). Congressional proposal and approval has been the only method used for the 27 ammendments so far. Six congressionally proposed and approved ammendments have failed to achieve ratification, four of which are still pending.
You can argue that the state ratification requirement means Congress does not hold the power, but such pendantry distracts from the key point that the executive and judiciary have no proper role in constitutional ammendment at all.
If y’all are going to speak about the propriety of Trump’s emergency declaration, and the presidency’s role in setting tariffs, then you need to be directly addressing the federal statutes, as well as the caselaw from the last 80 years.
You cannot intelligently speak of the proper roles of the various U.S. gov branches using “common sense” arguments. You might as well talk about the energy equivalents of various fuels in terms of “it looks hotter to me.”
Well that didn’t last long.
So quick in fact that the telegraph scribblers didn’t have time to rush out their standard “Markets soar” followed by “Markets plunge” bullsh1t.
Strange how the presidential powers weren’t in question during COVID
Doesn’t matter. Trump has other ways to implement tariffs. He chose one path; there are others.
Comments are closed.