Connect with us

Politics

Trump’s Tariffs Deemed Unlawful by Divided Appeals Court

Published

on

Trump’s Tariffs Deemed Unlawful by Divided Appeals Court



On Friday, a divided U.S. appeals court ruled that the majority of tariffs imposed by President Donald Trump are illegal, delivering a major setback to one of his key international economic policy tools. The decision challenges Trump’s use of these levies to influence global trade relations and could have wide-ranging effects on U.S. trade agreements, affected industries, and supply chains. Legal experts note that the ruling may also set an important precedent for how future administrations implement tariffs and other trade measures.

The court allowed the tariffs to remain in place through October 14 to give the Trump administration a chance to file an appeal with the US Supreme Court.

The decision comes as a legal fight over the independence of the Federal Reserve also seems bound for the Supreme Court, setting up an unprecedented legal showdown this year over Trump’s entire economic policy.

Trump has made tariffs a pillar of US foreign policy in his second term, using them to exert political pressure and renegotiate trade deals with countries that export goods to the United States.

The tariffs have given the Trump administration leverage to extract economic concessions from trading partners but have also increased volatility in financial markets.

Trump lamented the decision by what he called a “highly partisan” court, posting on Truth Social: “If these Tariffs ever went away, it would be a total disaster for the Country”.

He nonetheless predicted a reversal, saying he expected tariffs to benefit the country “with the help of the Supreme Court”.

The 7-4 decision from the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington, DC, addressed the legality of what Trump calls “reciprocal” tariffs imposed as part of his trade war in April, as well as a separate set of tariffs imposed in February against China, Canada and Mexico.

Democratic presidents appointed six judges in the majority and two judges who dissented, while Republican presidents appointed one judge in the majority and two dissenters.

The court’s decision does not impact tariffs issued under other legal authority, such as Trump’s tariffs on steel and aluminium imports.

‘UNUSUAL AND EXTRAORDINARY’

Trump justified both sets of tariffs – as well as more recent levies – under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act.

IEEPA gives the president the power to address “unusual and extraordinary” threats during national emergencies.

“The statute bestows significant authority on the President to undertake a number of actions in response to a declared national emergency, but none of these actions explicitly include the power to impose tariffs, duties, or the like, or the power to tax,” the court said.

“It seems unlikely that Congress intended, in enacting IEEPA, to depart from its past practice and grant the President unlimited authority to impose tariffs.”

The 1977 law had historically been used for imposing sanctions on enemies or freezing their assets.

Trump, the first president to use IEEPA to impose tariffs, says the measures were justified given trade imbalances, declining US manufacturing power and the cross-border flow of drugs.

Trump’s Department of Justice has argued that the law allows tariffs under emergency provisions that authorise a president to “regulate” imports or block them completely.

Trump declared a national emergency in April over the fact that the US imports more than it exports, as the nation has done for decades.

Trump said the persistent trade deficit was undermining US manufacturing capability and military readiness.

Trump said the February tariffs against China, Canada and Mexico were appropriate because those countries were not doing enough to stop illegal fentanyl from crossing US borders, an assertion the countries have denied.

MORE UNCERTAINTY

William Reinsch, a former senior Commerce Department official now with the Centre on Strategic and International Studies, said the Trump administration had been bracing for this ruling.

“It’s common knowledge the administration has been anticipating this outcome and is preparing a Plan B, presumably to keep the tariffs in place via other statutes.”

There was little reaction to the ruling in after-hours stock trading.

“The last thing the market or corporate America needs is more uncertainty on trade,” said Art Hogan, chief market strategist at B. Riley Wealth.

Trump is also locked in a legal battle to remove Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook, potentially ending the central bank’s independence.

“I think it puts Trump’s entire economic agenda on a potential collision course with the Supreme Court. It’s unlike anything we’ve seen ever,” said Josh Lipsky, chair of international economics at the Atlantic Council.

The 6-3 conservative majority Supreme Court has issued a series of rulings favouring Trump’s second term agenda, but has also, in recent years, been hostile to expansive interpretations of old statutes to provide presidents newly-found powers.

The appeals court ruling stems from two cases, one brought by five small US businesses and the other by 12 Democratic-led US states, which argued that IEEPA does not authorise tariffs.

The Constitution grants Congress, not the president, the authority to impose taxes and tariffs, and any delegation of that authority must be both explicit and limited, according to the lawsuits.

The New York-based US Court of International Trade ruled against Trump’s tariff policies on May 28, saying the president had exceeded his authority when he imposed both sets of challenged tariffs.

The three-judge panel included a judge who was appointed by Trump in his first term.

Another court in Washington ruled that IEEPA does not authorise Trump’s tariffs, and the government has appealed that decision as well.

At least eight lawsuits have challenged Trump’s tariff policies, including one filed by the state of California.



Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Politics

At least 70 killed in capsize of migrant boat off West Africa, says Gambia

Published

on

At least 70 killed in capsize of migrant boat off West Africa, says Gambia


Representational image shows migrants on a capsizing boat off the coast of Libya in this handout picture released by the Italian Marina Militare on May 25, 2016. — Reuters
Representational image shows migrants on a capsizing boat off the coast of Libya in this handout picture released by the Italian Marina Militare on May 25, 2016. — Reuters

At least 70 people were killed when a boat carrying migrants capsized off the coast of West Africa, Gambia’s foreign affairs ministry said late on Friday, in one of the deadliest accidents in recent years along a popular migration route to Europe.

Another 30 people are feared dead after the vessel, believed to have departed from Gambia and carrying mostly Gambian and Senegalese nationals, sank off the coast of Mauritania early on Wednesday, the ministry said in a statement.

It was carrying an estimated 150 passengers, 16 of whom had been rescued. Mauritanian authorities recovered 70 bodies on Wednesday and Thursday, and witness accounts suggest over 100 may have died, the statement said.

The Atlantic migration route from the coast of West Africa to the Canary Islands, typically used by African migrants trying to reach Spain, is one of the world’s deadliest.

More than 46,000 irregular migrants reached the Canary Islands last year, a record, according to the European Union. More than 10,000 died attempting the journey, a 58% increase over 2023, according to the rights group Caminando Fronteras.

Gambia’s foreign affairs ministry implored its nationals to “refrain from embarking on such perilous journeys, which continue to claim the lives of many”.





Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

US allows Pakistan seafood exports for four years

Published

on

US allows Pakistan seafood exports for four years



Pakistan’s seafood industry has received a significant boost as the United States granted a four-year approval for fish exports, Federal Minister for Maritime Affairs Junaid Anwar Chaudhry announced.

Chaudhry said the license is global recognition of Pakistan’s seafood quality standards, proving that the country’s fisheries meet strict U.S. benchmarks.

He added that this approval will ensure continuity in exports to one of the world’s most valuable markets.

Sharing figures, the minister noted that Pakistan exported 242,000 tons of fish last year, generating $489 million in foreign exchange.

With U.S. access secured for the next four years, seafood exports are expected to increase, with projections reaching $600 million in the coming year.

He emphasized that U.S. approval will bring stability to the export sector, strengthen Pakistan’s global credibility, and open up fresh opportunities for the fishing community.

“This is a proud achievement for Pakistan, as our fisheries have demonstrated the ability to meet international quality requirements,” Chaudhry stated.

Meanwhile, Federal Finance Minister Muhammad Aurangzeb recently hinted at major U.S. investments in multiple sectors of Pakistan following successful trade talks.

In an informal discussion upon his return from the United States, Muhammad Aurangzeb said that the country will soon receive encouraging news of substantial investments across various sectors from the US.

He stated that during his visit, Pakistan achieved significant success in key meetings held as part of trade negotiations, which were highly appreciated by the US administration.

The minister described the trade talks with the US as a major success for the country, noting that Pakistan is moving in the right direction and the results will be visible soon.

Muhammad Aurangzeb underlined the need for making decisions that will bring long-term improvements to the economy and expressed satisfaction over the mutually successful outcome of the negotiations.



Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Turkey Restricts Israeli Ships and Official Flights from Its Territory

Published

on

Turkey Restricts Israeli Ships and Official Flights from Its Territory



Turkey’s top diplomat announced on Friday that Ankara has closed its ports and airspace to Israeli ships and aircraft, with a diplomatic source telling AFP that the restrictions specifically target “official” flights. The move comes amid escalating tensions between Turkey and Israel, reflecting Ankara’s strong stance in response to recent developments in Gaza.

The decision is expected to impact diplomatic and official travel, while signaling Turkey’s growing disapproval of Israeli actions in the region.

Ties between Turkey and Israel have been shattered by Israel’s war against Hamas in Gaza, with Ankara accusing Israel of committing “genocide” in the tiny Palestinian territory — a term roundly rejected by Israel — and suspending all trade ties in May last year.

“We have closed our ports to Israeli ships. We do not allow Turkish ships to go to Israeli ports…. We do not allow container ships carrying weapons and ammunition to Israel to enter our ports, nor do we allow their aircraft to enter our airspace,” Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan told lawmakers in a televised address.

Asked for clarification about the minister’s remarks, a Turkish diplomatic source said its airspace was “closed to all aircraft carrying weapons (to Israel) and to Israel’s official flights”.

It was not immediately clear when the airspace restrictions were put in place.

In November, Turkey refused to let the Israeli president’s plane cross its airspace, forcing him to cancel a planned visit to the COP29 climate conference in Azerbaijan.

And in May, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu cancelled a visit to Baku after Ankara reportedly refused overflight rights.

Trade cut off:

On Monday ZIM, Israel’s biggest shipping firm, said it had been informed that under new regulations passed by Ankara on August 22, “vessels that are either owned, managed or operated by an entity related to Israel will not be permitted to berth in Turkish ports”.

The information was made public in a filing to the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) in which ZIM warned the new regulation was expected to “negatively impact on the company’s financial and operational results”.

The ban also extended to other ships carrying military cargo destined for Israel, it said.

“Separately.. vessels that are carrying military cargo destined to Israel will not be permitted to berth in Turkish ports; in addition, Turkish-flagged vessels will be prohibited from berthing in Israeli ports.”

Fidan’s remarks were the first public acknowledgement of the ban.

“No other country has cut off trade with Israel,” he told Turkish lawmakers at an emergency session on the Gaza crisis.

Turkish officials have repeatedly insisted that all trade ties with Israel have been cut, vowing there would be no normalisation as long as the Gaza war continues.

But some Turkish opposition figures have accused Ankara of allowing trade to continue, notably by allowing oil shipments from Azerbaijan to pass through the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan (BTC) pipeline running through Turkey — claims dismissed by Turkey’s energy ministry as “completely unfounded”.

Although Azerbaijan has long been one of Israel’s main oil suppliers, data published on its state customs website this year no longer showed Israel as one of the countries that purchase oil from Baku, Israel’s Haaretz newspaper reported earlier this year.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending