US Court Of International Trade Blocks All Of Trumps Tariffs. All Of Them

[theHawk]

Except Europe is in a huge free trade zone known as the EU.

It was in all the papers.

The problem you guys have is you think Tariffs are why we can't sell overseas.

Nope. We can't sell overseas because our products are crap and don't match their market.

In Europe, all the cars are small to accommedate our roads.

We have all our cars as big old gas-guzzling SUVs to avoid sensible emission standards.

Fake News, the E.U. imposes tariffs on the US and countries outside the EU.

So if they don’t work, why do they do it?

Not all US cars are big. And you’d be surprised how much Europeans still want SUVs.
Funny how idiots try to use this argument that Europeans don’t want US cars. If that’s the case, why have tariffs against US cars? Our emissions standards are higher than Europe’s by the way.

I used to drive a V8 muscle car when I lived in Europe. So many people wished they could buy one.

 

[Crepitus]

/—-/ Pay back what?

The tariffs.

How did you not get that?

 

[Crepitus]

.


Time is coming.

Nuremberg 2.0


.

YOu keep saying that, but I doubt tRump will ever be brought to trial.

 

[cnm]

/—-/ You libtards said for months the American consumers pay the tariffs. What changed?

ffs

 

[excalibur]

The Left wants to kill American industry and jobs

President Trump has already negotiated several deals that are good for America, and more deals are coming, and the leftoids celebrate that those deals could be lost.

One authority for POTUS to act under, and there are more, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977 (IEEPA)

 

[CosmicRocker]

the bolded ruling prohibits presidential tariffs because Tariffs are only mentioned as Congressional purview in Article 1
^stupid morons
salient rebuttal > White House spokesperson Kush Desai said in a statement that: “It is not for unelected judges to decide how to properly address a national emergency."

https://www.cnn.com/2025/05/28/business/us-court-blocks-trumps-tariffs
But the Trump administration has not met that criteria for an emergency, the plaintiffs alleged. The lawsuit also alleges IEEPA doesn’t give the president the power to enact tariffs in the first place, and even if it was interpreted to, it “would be an unconstitutional delegation of Congress’s power to impose tariffs,” according to a statement.

The court concurred in its ruling that Trump lacked the authority to impose those tariffs even after declaring a national emergency.

“IEEPA does not authorize any of the worldwide, retaliatory, or trafficking tariff orders,” the panel of judges said in their order Wednesday. “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.”

 

[Winco]

President Trump has already negotiated several deals that are good for America, and more deals are coming, and the leftoids celebrate that those deals could be lost.

One authority for POTUS to act under, and there are more, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977 (IEEPA)

Scrutiny and Fact-Checking​

While these figures are substantial, independent analyses have raised questions about their accuracy and the extent of Trump's direct involvement:

• Overlapping Announcements: Some investment commitments have been announced multiple times or were initiated before Trump's current term. For instance, certain projects cited by the administration were already underway during previous administrations. CBS News+1Facebook+1
• Lack of Detailed Data: The administration has not provided comprehensive data to substantiate the $14 trillion figure. Analysts note that while there are significant investment pledges, the cumulative total may be lower than claimed. CBS News
• Economic Impact: Even if the investment figures are accurate, the actual impact on the U.S. economy depends on the successful implementation and execution of these projects, which can span several years.

Conclusion​

President Trump's assertion of securing $14 trillion in new investments encompasses a mix of foreign commitments and domestic projects. However, the veracity of this figure is subject to scrutiny due to overlapping announcements, lack of detailed data, and questions about the direct influence of the administration on these investments. Further transparency and detailed reporting would be necessary to fully assess the validity and potential impact of these investment claims.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

A federal court has struck down Donald Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariffs, ruling that the president overstepped his legal authority in imposing them on a broad range of countries, according to media reports.

The U.S. Court of International Trade issued the unanimous decision Wednesday, rejecting Trump’s April 2 tariff order – which he claimed was justified by national emergencies, Politico reported. The court’s ruling, however, found that justification inadequate under the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA).

The three-judge panel also ordered that tariffs collected under Trump’s order be “vacated.” The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

https://www.axios.com/2025/05/28/trump-tariffs-trade-court-ruling

That includes China. And the US may have to pay all of them back.

The decision is non binding on POTUS

 

[drudge X]

If American industry can't compete, maybe it needs to die.

Protectionism never works. It just hurts consumers.

Works for China.

 

[drudge X]

Scrutiny and Fact-Checking​

While these figures are substantial, independent analyses have raised questions about their accuracy and the extent of Trump's direct involvement:

• Overlapping Announcements: Some investment commitments have been announced multiple times or were initiated before Trump's current term. For instance, certain projects cited by the administration were already underway during previous administrations. CBS News+1Facebook+1
• Lack of Detailed Data: The administration has not provided comprehensive data to substantiate the $14 trillion figure. Analysts note that while there are significant investment pledges, the cumulative total may be lower than claimed. CBS News
• Economic Impact: Even if the investment figures are accurate, the actual impact on the U.S. economy depends on the successful implementation and execution of these projects, which can span several years.

Conclusion​

President Trump's assertion of securing $14 trillion in new investments encompasses a mix of foreign commitments and domestic projects. However, the veracity of this figure is subject to scrutiny due to overlapping announcements, lack of detailed data, and questions about the direct influence of the administration on these investments. Further transparency and detailed reporting would be necessary to fully assess the validity and potential impact of these investment claims.

Meaningless ruling.

 

[Dekster]

A federal court has struck down Donald Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariffs, ruling that the president overstepped his legal authority in imposing them on a broad range of countries, according to media reports.

The U.S. Court of International Trade issued the unanimous decision Wednesday, rejecting Trump’s April 2 tariff order – which he claimed was justified by national emergencies, Politico reported. The court’s ruling, however, found that justification inadequate under the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA).

The three-judge panel also ordered that tariffs collected under Trump’s order be “vacated.” The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

https://www.axios.com/2025/05/28/trump-tariffs-trade-court-ruling

That includes China. And the US may have to pay all of them back.

Why would the US pay back China when Americans are the ones having to pay the tariffs?

 

[excalibur]

Leftoids happy, CCP happy. Coincidence? I think not.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Nobody voted for the US Court Of International Trade

 

[excalibur]

Nobody voted for the US Court Of International Trade

And Congress authorized such actions under numerous laws.

They just scotched all the trade negotiations. Although someone above had mentioned, Trump can use another statute to continue.

This ruling is BS, and sadly the appeal must go to the DC Circuit Court of Appeals.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

A federal court has struck down Donald Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariffs, ruling that the president overstepped his legal authority in imposing them on a broad range of countries, according to media reports.

The U.S. Court of International Trade issued the unanimous decision Wednesday, rejecting Trump’s April 2 tariff order – which he claimed was justified by national emergencies, Politico reported. The court’s ruling, however, found that justification inadequate under the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA).

The three-judge panel also ordered that tariffs collected under Trump’s order be “vacated.” The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

https://www.axios.com/2025/05/28/trump-tariffs-trade-court-ruling

That includes China. And the US may have to pay all of them back.

Very good.

The court is correct, there is no ‘national emergency’ – just Trump’s dishonesty and contempt for the Constitution and rule of law.

 

[LeftofLeft]

The Left loves the Bench…. fuck the Interpret mission. Go for Legislate and Executive functions. All from the Bench (Courts)

 

[CosmicRocker]

The decision is non binding on POTUS

because of lack of authority?, It's a civil court. it looks like where trade disputes are heard. N way this rinky dink court can compel POTUS to stop all tariffs. agree

 

[JoeB131]

/—-/ You libtards said for months the American consumers pay the tariffs. What changed?

Nothing.

If my company had to pay the tariffs, we'd have passed them on to our customers.

Fortunately, it seems like sanity is reigning, for the moment.

 

[JoeB131]

Fake News, the E.U. imposes tariffs on the US and countries outside the EU.

So if they don’t work, why do they do it?

Not all US cars are big. And you’d be surprised how much Europeans still want SUVs.
Funny how idiots try to use this argument that Europeans don’t want US cars. If that’s the case, why have tariffs against US cars? Our emissions standards are higher than Europe’s by the way.

I used to drive a V8 muscle car when I lived in Europe. So many people wished they could buy one.

Guy, you need to turn off Hate Radio and realize what the real world is like.

 

[Doc7505]

A federal court has struck down Donald Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariffs, ruling that the president overstepped his legal authority in imposing them on a broad range of countries, according to media reports.

The U.S. Court of International Trade issued the unanimous decision Wednesday, rejecting Trump’s April 2 tariff order – which he claimed was justified by national emergencies, Politico reported. The court’s ruling, however, found that justification inadequate under the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA).

The three-judge panel also ordered that tariffs collected under Trump’s order be “vacated.” The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

https://www.axios.com/2025/05/28/trump-tariffs-trade-court-ruling

That includes China. And the US may have to pay all of them back.

~~~~~~
Unlike the ideological and ignorant Democrats that are gloating prematurely. let's take a look at the Law...
Whomever this shopped federal judge is, they did not read the law and this will be overturned as quickly as the the judge issued the ruling.
Read more:

How Congress delegates its tariff powers to the president​

How Congress delegates its tariff powers to the president | Constitution Center

President Donald Trump is expected to announce wide-sweeping tariffs on Wednesday, in a move with potentially broad consequences. So how does the president have the ability to levy tariffs under the Constitution?

constitutioncenter.org

The Constitution actually grants Congress the power to levy tariffs, but in recent years as a result of certain laws Congress has passed, the president and the executive branch have controlled when and how tariffs are placed on goods entering the United States.

The Constitution’s Article I, Section 8 states: “The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, … but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States.”
Over time, as Congress gave the president expanded powers on its behalf to enact tariff policies, opponents to several tariffs laws argued the statutes were an unconstitutional congressional delegation of authority to the president. Known as the non-delegation doctrine, the question of how much of its authority Congress can grant to the president and the judiciary goes back to the time of Chief Justice John Marshall.
Laws That Allow the President to Impose Tariffs

According to the Congressional Research Service, there are six statutory provisions currently in place that control how the president and the executive branch can use tariffs. Three provisions require federal agency investigations before a tariff can be imposed. The other provisions do not require an investigation before actions are taken.
Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 has been used by the first and second Trump administrations for steel and aluminum imports. It authorizes the president to ask the Secretary of Commerce to determine if goods are being imported in manner that threatens national security. The secretary then reports back to the president if he has any affirmative findings. “Section 232 does not require the President to follow the Secretary’s recommendations but permits him to take alternative actions or no action,” the CRS says. Under Section 232, there is no maximum time limit on the president’s tariff actions.