Costco Wholesale is suing the Trump administration, contesting the legality of tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), seeking a full refund of duties paid. The lawsuit argues that the IEEPA doesn’t explicitly authorize the President to set tariffs. This legal challenge follows the Supreme Court’s review of the tariff agenda, where justices expressed skepticism. Costco, like several other major companies, is seeking refunds, having previously absorbed costs on imported goods such as pineapples and bananas to protect customer prices.
Read More
In a recent Truth Social post, former President Trump expressed his frustration with the Supreme Court, particularly justices he appointed, who are questioning the legality of his tariffs. The Supreme Court is currently reviewing arguments concerning Trump’s authority to impose tariffs without congressional approval, and the justices have expressed skepticism regarding his legal justifications. Trump, who has utilized the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to bypass Congress, faces potential legal challenges, as the court’s decision could lead to a significant refund of tariff revenue. In addition to his tariff concerns, Trump also urged Republican senators to eliminate the filibuster to expedite the budget process and reopen the government.
Read More
The Supreme Court has agreed to expedite a case concerning President Trump’s authority to impose broad tariffs, with arguments scheduled for November. The case challenges the legality of these tariffs, which were implemented using the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). A federal appeals court previously found the tariffs were illegally implemented, potentially leading to refunds. The outcome of the Supreme Court’s decision could have significant implications, potentially setting clearer boundaries on presidential trade actions and impacting the government’s ability to collect duties.
Read More
A federal appeals court recently delivered a significant setback to Donald Trump’s tariff agenda. The court ruled that the president’s use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose tariffs was illegal, as the law doesn’t grant the power to levy taxes. This decision largely affirms an earlier ruling, rejecting the argument that tariff imposition falls within the president’s foreign policy authority. While the court acknowledged the president’s constitutional authority, it emphasized that the power to tax belongs to Congress. The White House has stated that they will continue to work on this matter, with Trump himself criticizing the ruling and predicting the Supreme Court would allow his tariffs.
Read More
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
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
A US trade court ruled President Trump’s sweeping tariffs illegal, exceeding his authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). The Trump administration immediately appealed, seeking a stay from the ruling to prevent what it called irreparable economic harm, and plans to take the case to the Supreme Court. The ruling invalidated tariff orders issued under the IEEPA, requiring new orders within ten days, but industry-specific tariffs remain unaffected. While the White House denounced the decision as judicial overreach, the ruling was celebrated in global financial markets.
Read More
A federal court blocked President Trump’s widespread tariffs, deeming them beyond his legal authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). The court rejected the administration’s claim that IEEPA permitted such broad tariff powers, finding the levies on various countries (including a global 10% tariff) addressed trade imbalances rather than genuine emergencies. The ruling specifically targeted tariffs imposed on China, Mexico, and Canada, deemed unrelated to stated justifications of drug trafficking and illegal immigration. The Trump administration plans to appeal the decision.
Read More
A federal court blocked President Trump’s broad use of emergency powers to impose tariffs, halting a key component of his trade policy. The ruling, from the U.S. Court of International Trade, found that Trump exceeded his authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). While some tariffs imposed under different legal authorities remain, the decision represents a significant legal setback for the administration. The White House has appealed the ruling, setting the stage for a potential Supreme Court review.
Read More
Five small businesses filed suit against President Trump in the U.S. Court of International Trade, challenging his recently imposed tariffs as an illegal usurpation of Congress’s power to levy taxes. The suit argues that Trump’s declaration of a trade deficit emergency, used to justify the tariffs under the IEEPA, is unfounded and that the act does not grant him such unilateral authority. The Liberty Justice Center, representing the plaintiffs, contends that the tariffs, impacting businesses nationwide, are economically devastating and based on a fabricated crisis. The lawsuit seeks to invalidate the tariffs, emphasizing the principle of “no taxation without representation.”
Read More
John Q. Hosedrinker