Posted on 08/01/2025 6:51:52 AM PDT by karpov
WASHINGTON (AP) — Appellate court judges expressed broad skepticism Thursday over President Donald Trump’s legal rationale for his most expansive round of tariffs.
Members of the 11-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington appeared unconvinced by the Trump administration’s insistence that the president could impose tariffs without congressional approval, and it hammered its invocation of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to do so.
“IEEPA doesn’t even mention the word ‘tariffs’ anywhere,” Circuit Judge Jimmie Reyna said, in a sign of the panel’s incredulity to a government attorney’s arguments.
Brett Shumate, the attorney representing the Trump administration, acknowledged in the 99-minute hearing “no president has ever read IEEPA this way” but contended it was nonetheless lawful.
The 1977 law, signed by President Jimmy Carter, allows the president to seize assets and block transactions during a national emergency. It was first used during the Iran hostage crisis and has since been invoked for a range of global unrest, from the 9/11 attacks to the Syrian civil war.
Trump says the country’s trade deficit is so serious that it likewise qualifies for the law’s protection.
In sharp exchanges with Shumate, appellate judges questioned that contention, asking whether the law extended to tariffs at all and, if so, whether the levies matched the threat the administration identified.
“If the president says there’s a problem with our military readiness,” Chief Circuit Judge Kimberly Moore posited, “and he puts a 20% tax on coffee, that doesn’t seem to necessarily deal with (it).”
Shumate said Congress’ passage of IEEPA gave the president “broad and flexible” power to respond to an emergency, but that “the president is not asking for unbounded authority.”
(Excerpt) Read more at apnews.com ...
Congress Gabe him the authority via a congressional act.
The Constitution never mentioned District Judges either.
Congress gave him the authority via a congressional act.
Maybe the dipsh*ts should first spend more time questioning whether Appellate judges can question Trump’s authority to impose tariffs without Congress...
Chief Circuit Judge Kimberly
Scraping the bottom of the barrel with Judge Jimmie on a DC-based federal appellate court.
FrontPage.com: “Inside Every Progressive Is A Totalitarian Screaming To Get Out” —David Horowitz
Maybe that aphorism needs a corollary: “Inside Every District Court Judge Is A Totalitarian Screaming To Get Out”
Meanwhile, all sane people question the AP’s ability to report a story without leaving off crucial details that change the entire nature of the story.
Shameless.
“The Constitution never mentioned District Judges either.”
ROFLOL. Exactly. District Judges way out of their lane, trying to over rule the votes of the people. It’s Misconduct.
What a bunch of Whiners judges have become
The judges can bend over and kiss their own sorry asses.
Just shut up ,and let Trump save America.
Kaboom! +1
Tough. This was already litigated. SCOTUS already rules against you. Trump can do it. There’s NOTHING you can do about it so suck it up buttercup.
Expecting congressional approval for tariffs is laughable. If that was the case there would never be any agreements. We’re talking over 90 countries; far too complex for congress to ever deal with.
The judges are right about this. Tariffs should be set by Congress.
Yes, Congress enacted legislation in 1977, during Jimmy Carter’s administration, granting the president authority to impose sanctions in “emergency” situations. I’ve not researched the legislative history, but I recall that this was while the dems held their post-Watergate supermajorities in both the House and Senate. Tip O’Neil and Bob Byrd did pretty much whatever they wanted to do. The camel’s nose got under the tent in many areas.
Once the camel’s nose is inside the tent, the slide down the slippery slope begins. I don’t know all the twists and turns of tariff policy since then, but Trump has clearly slipped all vestigial bounds and is setting tariffs by unilateral decree, with dramatic shifts overnight with no notice becoming normalized.
If a president can declare an emergency unilaterally, and then do virtually anything unilaterally as an emergency measure, he is a dictator. I do not expect the courts to uphold him on this.
On myriad issues, most freepers have been applauding the cautious steps the current Supreme Court has taken to rein in sweeping delegation of lawmaking powers by Congress to the administrative state, and the subsequent activist power grabs by rogue agencies that has ensued. Yes, this needs to be checked. Congress needs to do its job. Tariff policy is no different.
The best construction is that Trump anticipates this and is acting in a way designed to force Congress’ hand. Maybe. Tariffs are among the many issues on which Congress needs to step up. But too many Republicans are content to blindly follow Trump, and most of the democrats, when they take a break from their hate rants against Trump, are quietly relishing the precedents he is setting and waiting for their chance to install their own dictator.
hmm, who declares an emergency? If there is a hurricane do they all go to congress to declare an emergency? Wildfires, do they ask congress to declare an emergency? The President declares emergencies. They happen to not agree that this is an emergency but to people in Iowa maybe a wildfire in California is not an emergency. Why would a Senator from Iowa every vote to declare an emergency in California (As a Representative of the State of Iowa)? The reality is they just don’t agree with the President that trade constitutes a national emergency. That’s nice, they can vote him out next election because that’s the only say they really have.
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.