WASHINGTON, D.C. — A federal appeals court has granted a temporary reprieve to former President Donald Trump, allowing his administration’s contested global import tariffs to remain in effect while legal challenges continue. The decision comes just a day after the U.S. Court of International Trade ruled the tariffs illegal, stating Trump exceeded his authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) by imposing sweeping duties without Congressional approval.
What the Lower Court Ruled:
- Tariffs imposed on goods from China, Mexico, and Canada—originally justified by Trump as targeting fentanyl smuggling—were deemed unlawful.
- The court also struck down the blanket 10% import tax Trump imposed on global imports and reciprocal tariffs on EU and Chinese goods.
- However, tariffs on cars, steel, and aluminium (invoked under a different law, Section 232, citing national security) remain unaffected.
White House Reaction:
- Trump officials blasted the lower court decision as “judicial overreach.”
- In its appeal, the administration said the court was “improperly second-guessing the president”, undermining trade negotiations.
- Trump called the decision “horrible” and “country-threatening” in a social media post, urging the Supreme Court to reverse it swiftly.
Next Steps:
- The case will continue, with the next hearing set for June 5.
- A separate federal court also ruled narrowly against the tariffs, but only applied the decision to a single toy company.
- Trump advisers hinted that alternative legal routes like Section 301 or Section 338 might be used if courts ultimately block the tariffs.
Key Legal Frameworks in Play
- IEEPA (1977): Used by Trump for many tariffs — now under legal scrutiny.
- Section 232 (1962): Invoked for tariffs on steel, aluminium, and cars — still stands.
- Section 301 (1974): Used against China during Trump’s first term.
- Section 338 (1930): An unused but possible fallback option allowing 50% tariffs for “discrimination.”
Trump’s aggressive trade policies remain in legal limbo, but the latest appeals court decision allows his tariff regime to stand temporarily, highlighting an ongoing clash between presidential authority and judicial oversight in U.S. trade policy. The final outcome may rest with the Supreme Court.
