Permanent Injunction
Remember when GSC said immediate tariffs were a smart negotiating tactic that greased the political and structural wheels?
It turns out implementing the tariffs FIRST and then pausing them was a huge mistake. Not only did other countries see our market tank, and our citizens revolt, and Trump chicken out, but now the courts are blocking his actions too. What does China have to be scared of?
Granted, I’m not saying this fight is over, but I again say Trump handled this in the most hamfisted way possible.
And the idea that unpausing the tariffs is easier than making new tariffs is horseshit, as evidenced by Trump’s recent threat of slapping 50% tariffs on the EU. Apparently the paused reciprocal tariffs did not serve as a threat, and it was okay to threaten future tariffs in a negotiation…
And just like that, an injuction on the injunction. Sigh…
An appeal was entirely expected.
The main point here is that, under IEEPA, I do think Trump has the powers to impose tariffs in response to national emergencies. So whatever legal battles take place, I expect Trump to ultimately win.
It’s possible a tariff on everybody will be overreach, but I’m positive Trump can finagle the law to allow specific tariffs on specific countries for specific reasons. He just needs to fill in those blanks correctly.
The question is what is the national emergency that is currently taking place that would justify these tariffs? I actually think he loses this battle. I could be wrong. Wouldn’t be the first time I was wrong. Despite all this, I can say that watching this administration at work has been a disaster.
You can look at the active list here:
We can see that:
- There are a lot more “emergencies” declared than people realize.
- It’s normal for a given president to declare several of these.
- These emergencies tend to be pretty vague.
Now what’s true is that IEEPA hasn’t been used to specifically impose tariffs before, but you’ll note that the court that blocked the tariffs never said Trump didn’t have the power to impose them. And IEEPA is an economic powers act that empowers the president to regulate international commerce due to outside threats.
To me the writing is on the wall that Trump does indeed have this power.
The specific reason these tariffs were struck down was:
- The “global tariffs” were deemed too broad, and
- The “fentanyl tariffs” had nothing to do with the actual problem, ie. fentanyl.
Again, it may be possible a global tariff ends up being overreach, but figuring out how to penalize specific countries, especially China, is just a matter of framing the emergency and the wording of the sanction, IMO.
What you said makes sense, but this is nothing but pure stock manipulation at the highest of levels. If he were really imposing the tariffs due to “emergencies” he wouldn’t be pulling them back almost as quickly as he places them.
hilarious.
I’ll call it now.
SCOTUS will (if the appeals court doesn’t) will find that Trump was within his rights under IPEEA to declare a national emergency and enact the tariffs.
Remember - Congress has outsourced this function to the President. If I’m the court my reasoning would be- if Congress wants their power back, LEGISLATE IT.
But keep on with these fake mistakes you keep talking about.
By the way- we revolted over tariffs? When did that happen? Another Jan 6 lol
I could be wrong, but I don’t think the court ever challenged Trump’s right to declare national emergencies or enact tariffs. I think the ruling to block was more procedural than that, as in Trump didn’t do things the right way. But given he reworks the wording of the national emergencies and the structure of the tariffs, I do believe he has the power to ultimately win out here.