New York [US], May 29 (ANI): A U.S. federal court in Manhattan has ruled against former President Donald Trump’s sweeping tariff measures, declaring that the administration exceeded its legal authority by imposing broad import duties under emergency economic powers. The decision, delivered by the U.S. Court of International Trade, effectively halts enforcement of most of Trump’s contested tariffs, though the ruling is pending appeal, according to CNN.
The court determined that the tariffs—such as the 30% duties on Chinese goods, 25% tariffs on select imports from Mexico and Canada, and a general 10% levy on a range of other imports—were not legally justified under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). Notably, this ruling does not affect tariffs on automobiles, steel, and aluminum, which were enacted under the separate U.S. Trade Expansion Act.
The case was brought forward by the Liberty Justice Center on behalf of small businesses, including wine importer VOS Selections, which argued that the tariffs had caused significant financial harm. Additionally, a separate lawsuit brought by a coalition of twelve Democrat-led states was consolidated into the decision.
In its unanimous ruling, the judicial panel declared that the IEEPA does not grant the president authority to impose tariffs as a retaliatory or blanket economic measure. “IEEPA does not authorize any of the worldwide, retaliatory, or trafficking tariff orders,” the judges stated. “The worldwide and retaliatory tariff orders exceed any authority granted to the President by IEEPA to regulate importation by means of tariffs. The trafficking tariffs fail because they do not deal with the threats set forth in those orders.”
The court issued a permanent injunction on these tariffs and granted the federal government a 10-day window to respond. If the ruling is upheld on appeal, it could dismantle the core of Trump’s tariff policy framework before any pending trade agreements with affected countries are finalized.
The Trump administration has already filed an appeal, arguing that the tariffs were necessary to protect national security and economic interests. However, legal analysts suggest the court’s interpretation may set a strong precedent limiting executive power over international trade measures.
Financial markets reacted positively to the decision. Major stock index futures surged in after-hours trading, signaling optimism among investors about reduced trade tensions and lower import costs.
The ruling also casts a shadow over Trump’s earlier attempt to implement a uniform “reciprocal” tariff policy. On April 2, the former president introduced substantial duties on imports from key U.S. trading partners. But just one week later, on April 9, he paused their implementation for 90 days, although a 10% tariff on most imported goods remained active.
If upheld, the court’s decision may represent a significant shift in the balance of power between Congress and the presidency in regulating trade, curbing the use of emergency powers for broad economic policy decisions. (ANI)
About The Author
