Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

President Trump Isn’t a Tariff King. A sweeping trade court ruling puts the executive in his proper constitutional place.
Wall Street Journal ^ | May 29, 2025 | WSJ Editorial Board

Posted on 05/30/2025 3:58:50 AM PDT by karpov

In a ruling heard ’round the world, the U.S. Court of International Trade on Wednesday blocked President Trump’s sweeping tariffs. This is an important moment for the rule of law as much as for the economy, proving again that America doesn’t have a king who can rule by decree.

The Trump tariffs have created enormous costs and uncertainty, but now we know they’re illegal. As the three-judge panel explains in its detailed 52-page ruling, the President exceeded his emergency powers and bypassed discrete tariff authorities delegated to him by Congress. The ruling erases his April 2 tariffs as well as those on Canada and Mexico.

Small businesses and several states (V.O.S. Selections v. U.S.) challenged Mr. Trump’s use of the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose tariffs willy-nilly. That law gives the President broad authority in a national emergency to “deal with any unusual and extraordinary threat” including to “regulate” the “importation” of foreign property.

After declaring fentanyl an emergency, the President in February slapped tariffs on Mexico, Canada and China. Then in April he deemed the U.S. trade deficit an emergency and imposed tariffs of varying rates on the world. He later reduced those to 10% across the board for 90 days, supposedly to allow time to negotiate trade deals.

No other President has used IEEPA to impose tariffs. As the trade court explains, Richard Nixon used the law’s precursor, the Trading With the Enemy Act, in 1971 to impose 10% tariffs for a short period to address a balance of payments problem. The Justice Department said Mr. Trump’s tariffs are no different.

Not so. As the panel notes, Nixon tariffs were upheld by an appeals court because they were a “limited surcharge”

(Excerpt) Read more at wsj.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Editorial; Government
KEYWORDS: checkersmaximus; christophersteele; concerntroll; concerntrolling; fakenews; freetraitors; fusiongps; glennsimpson; groothenevertrumper; murdochrag; nevertrump; nevertrumpingtroll; noitdoesnt; openbordersrag; paidpropagandists; peterfritsch; russiagate; taco; tariffs; tds; wsj; wsjsedition; wsjtreason; zot
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-56 next last
full article
1 posted on 05/30/2025 3:58:50 AM PDT by karpov
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: karpov

Hey NeverTrumper - Eff the WSJ.


2 posted on 05/30/2025 4:05:15 AM PDT by TTFlyer (Lenin: that by the infliction of terror, a well-organized minority can conquer a nation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: karpov

F U WSJ


3 posted on 05/30/2025 4:05:32 AM PDT by WashingtonSource
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: karpov

So another court, conspires to bring America down. That’s just great. Since when do we listen to International court rulings,
this is still America the land of the free, right?


4 posted on 05/30/2025 4:06:03 AM PDT by spincaster (ifi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: karpov

Old news, the appellate courts are already overturning the political tariff court rulings, sorry never trumper.


5 posted on 05/30/2025 4:06:15 AM PDT by Skwor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: karpov

Notice that the WSJ doesn’t mention that this this ruling was immediately stayed?


6 posted on 05/30/2025 4:06:58 AM PDT by clee1 (We use 43 muscles to frown, 17 to smile, and 2 to pull a trigger. I'm lazy and don't wish to smile.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: karpov

OLD NEWS. Already OVERTURNED ON APPEAL BY TRUMP ADMIN.


7 posted on 05/30/2025 4:07:40 AM PDT by Bobbyvotes (Only thing that scares me now is my age number. I am older than Biden, but in very good health!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: clee1

It was evidently si important to them to put out their pompous message of how better their opinions are that they ignored it being stayed/stopped for appeal immediately.


8 posted on 05/30/2025 4:09:43 AM PDT by desertsolitaire (Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: clee1

Yup, that “Editorial” board are not newsmaen, they are paid propagandists driving a narrative


9 posted on 05/30/2025 4:09:46 AM PDT by Steven Tyler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Skwor

Right? The ruling heard ’round the world’ hardly made it around the block.


10 posted on 05/30/2025 4:12:03 AM PDT by DeplorablePaul
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: karpov

The United States Court of International Trade (CIT) is a specialized federal court that handles civil actions arising out of U.S. customs and international trade laws. It is an Article III court, meaning its judges are appointed for life. The court has nationwide jurisdiction and is authorized to hold hearings in foreign countries.


11 posted on 05/30/2025 4:14:12 AM PDT by tired&retired (Blessings )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: karpov

As a group, lawyers are the least impressive of all professionals. Yes, there are exceptions, but there are so many lawyers now and law schools are so political such that putting any group of lawyers in charge of almost anything in government is a recipe for failure.


12 posted on 05/30/2025 4:16:46 AM PDT by neverevergiveup
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tired&retired

Judges of The United States Court of International Trade
Chief Judge Mark A. Barnett

Judge Thomas J. Aquilino, Jr.

Judge M. Miller Baker

Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves

Judge Richard K. Eaton

Judge Leo M. Gordon

Judge Gary S. Katzmann

Judge Claire R. Kelly

Judge Joseph A. Laroski, Jr.

Judge Timothy M. Reif

Judge Jane A. Restani

Judge Timothy C. Stanceu

Judge Stephen Alexander Vaden

Judge Lisa W. Wang


13 posted on 05/30/2025 4:17:00 AM PDT by tired&retired (Blessings )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: karpov

“In a ruling heard ’round the world”

Hahahaha


14 posted on 05/30/2025 4:18:24 AM PDT by Vision (“Our Democracy” means "Our Slush Fund." The Left is hate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: karpov

Given the appellate court already stayed this rogue court, the timing of the article is pretty amusing


15 posted on 05/30/2025 4:20:33 AM PDT by TheThirdRuffian (Orange is the new brown)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: karpov

Donald Trump Tariff King. I like it. Good idea Wall Street Journal.


16 posted on 05/30/2025 4:21:06 AM PDT by subterfuge (I'm a pure-blood!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: karpov

Another “editorial board” piece from the Wall Street China Journal. They do that whenever they pretend nobody in particular loses creds writing trash pieces.

Foreigners are much better biz for elitists in NYC and DC than Americans, who’ve quit buying their rag.


17 posted on 05/30/2025 4:22:38 AM PDT by AAABEST (That time Washington0 DC became a corrupted, existential threat to us all...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: karpov

the FULL MURDOCK


18 posted on 05/30/2025 4:23:58 AM PDT by JonPreston ( ✌ ☮️ )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: karpov

OVERRULED! F ‘em!


19 posted on 05/30/2025 4:31:47 AM PDT by wetgundog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: karpov

Except CONGRESS granted the President that power and that majority Democrat appointed trade court has already been overruled. Its hardly a surprise the open borders/”free” trade Murdochs are spouting this line.


20 posted on 05/30/2025 4:35:51 AM PDT by FLT-bird
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-56 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson