We all knew the system would strike back. There are trillions at stake.
UPDATES AT BOTTOM: A federal trade court based out of New York has just ruled in a three-judge decision that President Trump does not have the authority within the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to initiate emergency trade tariffs. [The Ruling is HERE]
WASHINGTON DC – A federal trade court ruled President Trump didn’t have the authority to impose sweeping tariffs on virtually every nation, voiding the levies that have sparked a global trade war and threatened to upend the world economy.
The decision on Wednesday from the Court of International Trade blocked one of the Trump administration’s most audacious assertions of executive power, under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977, and sets the stage for a possible appeal by the White House.
“The court does not read IEEPA to confer such unbounded authority and sets aside the challenged tariffs imposed thereunder,” a three-judge panel wrote. (link)
“The Worldwide and Retaliatory Tariff Orders exceed any authority granted to the President by IEEPA to regulate importation by means of tariffs,” the court wrote. The court also ordered that the tariffs that the Trump administration has collected so far be “vacated.”
UPDATE #1: I’m tearing through this ruling right now and I can find several structural flaws in the 3-judge panel decision.
[From Page 6, pdf] “…[…] in 1962, Congress delegated to the President the power to take action to adjust imports when the Secretary of Commerce finds that an “article is being imported into the United States in such quantities or under such circumstances as to threaten to impair the national security.” Trade Expansion Act of 1962, Pub. L. No. 87-794, § 232(b), 76 Stat. 872, 877 (codified as amended at 19 U.S.C. § 1862(c)(1)(A)). This delegation is conditioned upon an investigation and findings by the Secretary of Commerce, and agreement by the President. See id. Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, requires that the U.S. Trade Representative (“USTR”) take action, which may include imposing tariffs, where “the rights of the United States under any trade agreement are being denied” or “an act, policy, or practice of a foreign country” is “unjustifiable and burdens or restricts United States commerce.” 19 U.S.C. § 2411(a)(1)(A)–(B). The USTR may impose duties also where the USTR determines that “an act, policy, or practice of a foreign country is unreasonable or discriminatory and burdens or restricts United States commerce.” Id. § 2411(b)(1). This power is conditioned on extensive procedural requirements including an investigation that culminates in an affirmative finding that another country imposed unfair trade barriers under § 2411(a)(1)(A) or (B) or § 2411(b), and a public notice and comment period. See id. § 2414(b).”… [source]
I’ve just gotten started, but that citation is just one reason why the ruling can be overturned on appeal.
The Sec 301/302 investigation and process noted above was completed by USTR Jamieson Greer, with extensive citation. USTR Greer published a 397-page investigative outcome detailing the “unreasonable and discriminatory” burdens to United States commerce. [SEE HERE pdf]
The New York trade court literally ignored the 2025 USTR investigation, AND the 2025 Dept of Commerce review and investigation of the same based on the USTR published findings. All of those factual investigative findings underpin the Presidential actions taken pursuant to his authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act.
It looks like the trade court didn’t even review the USTR reports.
The USTR link to review all of the legal and trade details on the Trump tariffs IS HERE.
The judges just unplugged Trump’s tariff dashboard, right in the middle of a game
https://www.coffeeandcovid.com/p/literally-thursday-may-29-2025-c
so….the constitution is just art.
side question…where were all these judges and concern for law under obama…or biden?
never mind…i know.
They were under a rock – should have stayed there.
Do you remember what happened when Sleepy Joe discovered his unilateral power to cancel student loans?
The CTH archives are a useful resource!
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/blog/tag/student-loans/
SPOILER: This is from the most recently archived article:
Joe Biden Reacts to Supreme Court Restraining His Unilateral Power to Forgive Student Loans…
June 30, 2023 | Sundance | 315 Comments
Joe Biden reads his response to the Supreme Court decision that blocked the executive branch from permanently eliminating student debt without an act of Congress.
In his defense of the smackdown by SCOTUS, Biden conflates his unilateral student loan giveaway with the legislatively authorized PPP program. One is from executive fiat, the other from legislative assembly; see the difference? Yes Joe, if you wanted it to be legit, you needed an act of Congress
Meanwhile the MAGA agenda gets sand thrown in the gears, slowing down or halting everything. It’s death by a thousand cuts from the judiciary. Every court victory eats up the one precious resource Trump doesn’t have. Time. I think Trump needs to take a bold action soon against these rogue judges and courts.
Yes, otherwise the other side will just keep doing what they are doing until the time runs out.
Rudolph Contreras, Peter Strzok’s old buddy, emerges again against President Trump.
BREAKING: Obama Judge Rules Trump’s Tariffs Are Unlawful
A federal judge on Thursday issued a preliminary injunction and ruled President Trump’s tariffs are unlawful under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA).
US District Judge Rudolph Contreras, an Obama appointee said Trump’s tariffs are “unlawful.”
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2025/05/breaking-obama-judge-rules-trumps-tariffs-are-unlawful/
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
Strzok-Page texts reveal personal relationship between FBI official and judge recused from Flynn case
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/strzok-page-texts-reveal-personal-relationship-between-fbi-official-and-judge-recused-from-flynn-case
The federal judge who presided over former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn’s case last year before mysteriously being recused had a personal relationship with anti-Trump FBI official Peter Strzok, according to text mesages obtained and reviewed by Fox News.
The revelations about U.S. District Court Judge Rudolph Contreras are found in a new batch of text messages between Strzok and his FBI paramour, Lisa Page.
Contreras was appointed to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) in 2016, a topic of conversation between Strzok and Page.
“Rudy is on the FISC! Did you know that?” Page texted Strzok on July 25, 2016. “Just appointed two months ago.”
“I did,” Strzok replied. “We talked about it before and after. I need to get together with him.”
Our enemies must love our court system.
FUBAR
Yes, your assertion is supported by recent legal developments. A notable example is the case of V.O.S. Selections, Inc. v. United States, where the U.S. Court of International Trade ruled that President Trump’s imposition of the “Liberation Day” tariffs exceeded his authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). The court determined that the IEEPA does not grant the President unlimited power to impose tariffs without clear congressional authorization. This decision underscores the importance of adhering to statutory procedures and limitations when implementing trade measures.
Furthermore, the court emphasized that while the President has certain powers to address national emergencies, these powers are not without bounds and must comply with the Constitution and existing laws. The ruling highlighted that any significant trade actions, such as imposing tariffs, require a clear and specific delegation of authority from Congress, accompanied by appropriate procedural safeguards.
This case illustrates that if the executive branch fails to follow the required procedures or exceeds its delegated authority, courts have the power to overturn such actions. Therefore, your point about the potential for rulings to be overturned on appeal due to procedural or statutory violations is valid and substantiated by recent legal precedents.
Sundance’s post references the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 which does give a president powers to adjust imports. Also referenced is the Trade Act of 1974 which specifically gives authority to the executive branch to impose tariffs. The referenced document “2025 National Trade Estimate Report on Foreign Trade Barriers” appears to meet the requirements set out in those acts to justify adjustment of imports and imposition of tariffs. Since those pieces of legislation grant the powers asserted by President Trump, I don’t understand why you seem to imply that the district court’s ruling is correct.
It’s not a district court. It is a specialized Article III court created by Congress under the authority to establish “inferior courts”. As such it has section 2 power over all cases in law and equity. Previously it had been established as an administrative Article I court.
Forget appeal. How about ignore, suspend habeus corpus and get it done.
“The New York trade court literally ignored the 2025 USTR investigation, AND the 2025 Dept of Commerce review and investigation of the same based on the USTR published findings.”
When a judge’s decisions are a contravention of the clear language of the law, that judge is subscribing to the Sotomayor school of thought, which places personal biases sacrosanct and the law irrelevant.
This is the same kind of thinking that allowed South African President Ramaphosa to defend crowd’s chanting “Kill the Boer! Kill the Boer!” as a “liberation chant!”
The Conspiratorial Cupidity of Communists.
Too cute by half.
And in other news the 11 member appeals court just stayed the ruling for the 3 judge court
https://www.cnbc.com/2025/05/29/blocked-trump-tariffs-trade-court-appeal.html
Waiting judge Boasberg to weigh in.
Only until June 9th.. The tarriffs can remain in effect till at least then
as reported on Fox News.
June 9 is a deadline to file. The stay remains in effect until further ordered. At least that is the way I read this
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cafc.23105/gov.uscourts.cafc.23105.7.0_1.pdf
The plaintiffs must file by June 5. The gov’t must file its response to this filing by June 9. Thanks for the link.
There is something seriously wrong with the conservative side of this mess (I know we all know this) that whenever the “other” side is in office we do not do the exact same thing to them that they do to us. Why were we not lawfaring biden six ways to Sunday no matter if we thought we could win or not. I suppose one of the reasons is we don’t have enough good patriotic people with money or credentials to do it. Why don’t we have conservative groups getting money from the federal government to use to take the leftists to court? We are so stupid.
4:454 PM – I just read that an appeals court stayed the International Trade Court’s ruling that blocked President Donald Trump’s tariffs!
Bottom line: Trump’s tariffs are back in effect!
This is a big one!
So many of these activist judges have activist spouses benefiting from their rulings (massive conflict of interest).
—-
Laura Loomer
@LauraLoomer
🚨 EXCLUSIVE 🚨
Spouse of Judge Who Issued Ruling Against Trump Tariffs Has International Corporate Ties That Benefit From Ruling, Raising Concerns Over Judicial Corruption and Conflicts of Interest….
….In a controversial ruling yesterday, Judge Timothy Reif of the U.S. Court of International Trade (USCIT) was one of the three judges on a panel who struck down tariffs imposed by the Trump administration, igniting a firestorm of criticism over judicial overreach.
However, the most damning aspect of the ruling went completely unnoticed by the media. Loomered Strategies
@LoomeredStrat
has exclusively uncovered evidence of judicial corruption and conflicts of interest that benefit the spouse of Judge Reif.
Cont reading…
https://twitter.com.com/LauraLoomer/status/1928181408133968328
The FTC shouldn’t have jurisdiction in this matter. As well, the Executive Branch has equal authority as the two others. President Trump has the authority and power to use the tariffs as he is doing. I don’t understand why he is even entertaining the judges orders. He doesn’t have too at all….. I understand impeachment or voted out, but its supposedly his last term. Screw it, he should do what the bloody We the People told him to do with our mandate of an election.
Re: “The New York trade court literally ignored the 2025 USTR investigation, AND the 2025 Dept of Commerce review and investigation of the same based on the USTR published findings. All of those factual investigative findings underpin the Presidential actions taken pursuant to his authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act.”
The 2025 USTR “investigation” is an annual report. An investigation is preceded by a public notice; I can’t find any notice for the Apr 2 ‘Liberation Day’ tariffs, and certainly not for the Feb 1 Canada/ fentanyl tariffs. Trump was only sworn in on Jan 20.
Beyond that, if the courts ignored those reports it’s because they are required under other tariff authorities available to the President. However, they are slower and more limited than the IEEPA.
Finally (I can quit anytime!) Trump’s Executive Order for the Canada (EO 14193) and Liberation Day (EO 14257) tariffs is quite clear – he is invoking *only* the IEEPA as his authority.
Link to Executive Order 14257
P. 16, point 5:
“Implementation Authority
The Secretary of Commerce and the United States Trade Representative, in consultation with [relevant departments] and the Chair of the International Trade Commission are hereby authorized to employ all powers granted to the President by IEEPA as may be necessary to implement this order. Each executive department and agency shall take all appropriate measures within its authority to implement this order.”
My emphasis.
Wonder how much China is able to control or influence our judiciary.