Second court blocks Trump tariffs as 'unlawful'
Source: ABC News
May 29, 2025, 1:00 PM
The Trump administration is urging the New York-based Court of International Trade to delay its order blocking President Donald Trump's sweeping tariffs, warning that enforcement of the ruling will cause a foreign policy disaster scenario. In an opinion on Wednesday, the three-judge panel struck down Trump's global tariffs as "contrary to law."
The judges found that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act -- which Trump used to enact his tariffs -- does not give him the "unlimited" power to levy tariffs like the president has in recent months. "The President's assertion of tariff-making authority in the instant case, unbounded as it is by any limitation in duration or scope, exceeds any tariff authority delegated to the President under IEEPA. The Worldwide and Retaliatory tariffs are thus ultra vires and contrary to law," the judges wrote.
According to the judges, Congress, not the president, has the authority to impose tariffs under most circumstances, and Trump's tariffs do not meet the limited condition of an "unusual and extraordinary threat" that would allow him to act alone.
On Thursday, a second federal court determined that Trumps global (sic) were unlawful. U.S. District Judge Rudolph Contreras said in an order the International Economic Emergency Economic Powers Act does not give the president the power to impose most of his recent tariffs. Notably, the decision from Contreras an Obama appointee only restricts the Trump administration's ability to collect tariffs from the two companies that filed the lawsuit, Learning Resources, Inc., and hand2mind, Inc.
Read more: https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/federal-court-trump-power-impose-tariffs-unilaterally/story?id=122290881
NOTE (from excerpt) - this is a 2nd court that limits the ruling to 2 companies -
(snip)
only restricts the Trump administration's ability to collect tariffs from the two companies that filed the lawsuit, Learning Resources, Inc., and hand2mind, Inc.
REFERENCE - https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143446849

LetMyPeopleVote
(164,108 posts)This is not surprising given the fact that these tariffs were clearly not authorized. There will be more rulings on these tariffs that also will hold them to be void
Link to tweet

BumRushDaShow
(153,696 posts)Stumbled on this 2nd ruling when looking for articles with more info on the pending SCOTUS appeal.
LetMyPeopleVote
(164,108 posts)There are too may fun opinions coming down to keep up and still get some billable hours in
Captain Zero
(7,903 posts)Load up those TACOs with salsa and sour cream for the big old TACO whine baby!
chowder66
(10,608 posts)"According to the administration, the court order would strip the president of leverage in trade negotiations, imperil the trade deals already reached, and make the country vulnerable to countries that feel a renewed boldness to take advantage of the current situation."
And who's fault it that, TACO TRUMP?!
""His claimed emergency is a figment of his own imagination," the lawsuit said. "Trade deficits, which have persisted for decades without causing economic harm, are not an emergency."
moonshinegnomie
(3,393 posts)losing leverage in trade negotiations is not an "emergency"
pfitz59
(11,521 posts)Congess won't.
LetMyPeopleVote
(164,108 posts)trump's attorneys had to make the legal commitment to refund all tariffs in order to get a stay of the rulings on trump's tariffs. The court of appeals issued the stay of the two injunctions based on the agreement by the trump administration to refund all tariffs if the ruling of these two courts are upheld on appeal.
Link to tweet
Link to tweet

BumRushDaShow
(153,696 posts)which is a smaller, very narrow one.
LetMyPeopleVote
(164,108 posts)It is my understanding that this stay applies to both cases
BumRushDaShow
(153,696 posts)I think this was directed to the Court of International Trade's case. The 2nd case went to a regular district court I believe.