Learning Resources and hand2mind petitioned the Supreme Court to expedite their challenge to President Trump’s tariffs, citing the significant economic impact on businesses and consumers. The companies argue that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) does not grant the president the authority to impose these tariffs. They request a September or October hearing, aiming to circumvent the appeals process currently underway in the D.C. Circuit Court. A lower court previously ruled against the administration, finding IEEPA did not authorize the tariffs, though this ruling was limited in scope. The Supreme Court’s intervention is sought to swiftly address the ongoing substantial financial harm caused by the tariffs.
Read More
In the days leading up to President Trump’s April 9th tariff pause, numerous members of Congress engaged in stock transactions totaling millions of dollars, raising ethical concerns. These transactions, many occurring amidst market volatility spurred by Trump’s trade policy announcements, involved both Democrats and Republicans. While lawmakers claim trades were managed by third-party advisors, the timing has fueled suspicion of insider trading. Experts and some on Capitol Hill argue that the lack of transparency and enforcement around congressional stock trading undermines public trust.
Read More
President Trump doubled tariffs on steel and aluminum imports from 25% to 50%, citing insufficient domestic production and national security concerns. This action, building upon a previous executive order, significantly impacts Ukraine, whose metallurgical exports constitute a large portion of its U.S. trade. While the White House claims the tariffs will bolster domestic industries, Ukraine’s economy, already strained by war, faces further jeopardy. The U.K. is exempt from the increased tariffs, remaining at 25%. Trump justified the increase as a simplification of metal import duties and alluded to potential retaliatory measures.
Read More
President Trump’s executive order doubling steel and aluminum tariffs to 50% temporarily excludes the UK due to a May 2025 US-UK economic prosperity deal. This deal, not yet in effect, aims to eliminate these tariffs entirely but could be revoked if the UK fails to comply with its terms. Until the deal’s parliamentary implementation, UK steel exporters remain subject to the 25% tariff. The UK government is working to finalize the agreement and protect British businesses.
Read More
President Trump doubled tariffs on steel and aluminum imports from 25% to 50%, impacting businesses reliant on imported metals. While the move aims to bolster the domestic steel industry, critics foresee negative consequences, including retaliatory tariffs from trade partners and substantial job losses in other US sectors. The UK received an exemption, maintaining a 25% tariff, due to ongoing trade negotiations. Economists predict further economic damage from the increased prices resulting from this protectionist measure.
Read More
Lee Jae-myung, South Korea’s newly elected president, faces immediate challenges upon assuming office, including addressing the economic fallout from President Trump’s tariffs. His victory, secured with a narrow margin over conservative rival Kim Moon-soo, provides him with a strong mandate and legislative power due to his party’s control of the National Assembly. However, he must navigate a complex foreign policy landscape, balancing relations with the U.S. and China amidst ongoing trade disputes and the Trump administration’s hawkish stance toward Beijing. His first priority will be establishing an emergency task force to tackle the economic and trade crisis, while simultaneously addressing the delicate North Korea situation and striving to restore political stability.
Read More
Wall Street traders have nicknamed President Trump “TACO” (Trump Always Chickens Out), reflecting his pattern of issuing tariff threats, causing market drops, then retreating. This nickname, however, may backfire; one expert predicts Trump will maintain tariffs to counter the perceived insult. Trump’s furious reaction to the nickname underscores its impact and his sensitivity to criticism of his trade tactics. The ongoing legal challenge to his reciprocal tariff policy adds further economic uncertainty.
Read More
A recent court ruling against Donald Trump’s tariffs has sparked outrage among his MAGA allies. The decision exposed significant flaws in the legal arguments supporting the tariffs, according to a lawyer for the opposing side. This legal setback represents a significant blow to Trump’s trade policies. The ruling’s implications are far-reaching and will likely impact future trade disputes.
Read More
A federal court initially ruled against President Trump’s tariffs, citing an overreach of executive authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). This ruling was temporarily stayed by a higher court pending appeal. Despite the legal challenges, market reactions were muted, with economists suggesting investors have already discounted the administration’s erratic trade policies. The administration plans to appeal to the Supreme Court if necessary, leaving the ultimate outcome uncertain and the future of the president’s trade agenda in question.
Read More
Following a federal court ruling partially invalidating President Trump’s tariffs, former Vice President Pence reiterated his stance that the president lacks the constitutional authority to unilaterally impose tariffs. Pence cited Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution, which grants Congress the power to levy taxes and duties. A federal court agreed, stating that the president’s invocation of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to justify tariffs exceeded his authority. The administration has appealed the decision, keeping the tariffs temporarily in effect pending the appeal’s outcome.
Read More
John Q. Hosedrinker