A national trade court in the United States ruled. It specifically noted that former President Donald Trump’s sweeping, protectionist, global tariffs—imposed starting last January—are illegal. The court, comprised of a three-judge panel, found that Trump exceeded his authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), a statute intended to address rare and extraordinary national emergencies.
The judges issued a permanent injunction that immediately halts all tariff orders made by Trump, which imposed blanket tariffs on imports from various U.S. trading partners. The government only has up to ten days to answer the ruling. This historic decision comes as companies are still pursuing legal battles over the tariffs. There are at least five other such cases still pending.
Kush Desai, White House deputy press secretary, defended Trump’s executive actions, asserting they were necessary to protect U.S. industry and national security. He stated, “It is not for unelected judges to decide how to properly address a national emergency.”
The IEEPA has a long and contentious history as a trade policy tool, and the court’s ruling sheds further light on its apex. In their ruling, judges were unequivocal that they do not review the merits or success of the tariffs. Yet, they underscored that the law demands appropriate authority to take such actions.
“That use is impermissible not because it is unwise or ineffective, but because [federal law] does not allow it.” – The judges
The ruling has major implications for U.S. companies that have been impacted by the tariffs. One New York wine and spirits importer has been outspoken about how the tariffs will prevent it from doing business. Likewise, a Virginia-based manufacturer of educational kits and musical instruments is deeply concerned that these tariffs will interfere with its business.
Financial analyst Robert Scott remarked on the broader impact of the tariffs during Trump’s first term, stating, “Most of those tariffs did not see the U.S. trade position improve.” He pointed out that trade deficits only went up even as China’s exports to the entire world still increased.
The Trump administration wasted no time in appealing the ruling. This unilateral action raised important questions about jurisdiction and the appropriateness of judicial oversight in (allegedly) national emergencies. About one of these judges – he was appointed by Trump, personally. Together with other nominees of former Presidents Barack Obama and Ronald Reagan, this underscores the bipartisan character of the court’s recent decision.
