August 30, 2025

In a spicy showdown, a US federal appeals court on Friday ruled that President Donald Trump overstepped his legal boundaries by slapping sweeping tariffs on nearly every country. The judges slammed his move to declare a national emergency to unleash import taxes, calling it unlikely that Congress intended such unlimited powers for the President. The decision, marked by a 7-4 vote, largely agreed with an earlier May ruling by a trade court in New York. But hold your horses! The court did not cancel the tariffs right away. It gave the Trump administration a breather to appeal the case at the Supreme Court. Not wasting time, Trump fired back on his social media platform, declaring, “If allowed to stand, this Decision would literally destroy the United States of America.” White House spokesman Kush Desai also defended the president, saying, "we look forward to ultimate victory on this matter.” This ruling puts a big roadblock in Trump's mission to revamp American trade policies on his own terms. He did have other laws to back import taxes, but with fewer powers and slower impact. His aggressive tariff tactics had rattled global markets, upset allies, and caused fears of higher prices and slow economic growth. Still, Trump used these tariffs like a chess master, pressuring countries like the EU and Japan into one-sided trade deals and raking in billions for the Treasury to help fund his massive tax cuts. Legal experts warn, “While existing trade deals may not automatically unravel, the administration could lose a pillar of its negotiating strategy, which may embolden foreign governments to resist future demands,” said Ashley Akers of Holland & Knight law firm. The government fears that scrapping the tariffs might force it to refund billions, hitting the US Treasury hard. Trump warned ominously, “It would be 1929 all over again, a GREAT DEPRESSION!” By July, tariff revenue hit a whopping $159 billion, more than double from the previous year. The Justice Department even warned that removing tariffs could mean “financial ruin" for America. The court's focus was on two main tariffs: - The "Liberation Day" tariffs from April 2, with huge tariffs up to 50% on countries with US trade deficits and 10% on almost everyone else. Trump blamed the long-term trade deficit as a national emergency. - The February 1 'trafficking tariffs' on Canada, China, and Mexico, targeting illegal drug and immigration flows. However, the Constitution says only Congress can impose taxes. Over time, lawmakers gave some powers to the president, which Trump pushed hard. But no president before used this emergency law (IEEPA) to justify tariffs. The challengers argued trade deficits don't justify an emergency, as the US has ran deficits for 49 years! Trump tried to lean on Nixon’s 1971 emergency tariffs during an economic crisis for backup, but courts said that law was different and didn’t apply. The trade court had already ruled in May that Trump's "Liberation Day" tariffs went too far and the trafficking tariffs failed to meet legal requirements. But this legal fight doesn’t touch other tariffs Trump imposed later, like those on steel, aluminum, autos, and China tariffs under Biden, based on national security and unfair trade practices. Trump can try other legal ways but with limits – like the Trade Act’s section for taxing countries with big trade deficits (15% for 150 days) or punishing unfair trade by China. Despite the setback, Trump insists on Truth Social, “ALL TARIFFS ARE STILL IN EFFECT! Today a Highly Partisan Appeals Court incorrectly said that our Tariffs should be removed, but they know the United States of America will win in the end.” The drama over America's trade future continues!

Read More at Thehindubusinessline →

Tags: Trump tariffs, Us court of appeals, Trade policy, National emergency, Import taxes, Trade deficit,