US Appeals Court Declares Most Trump Tariffs Illegal: Global Trade Tensions Intensify
Trump’s Tariff Policy Faces Major Legal Setback
Former US President Donald Trump’s trade policies faced a significant blow after the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington, DC, ruled that a majority of his tariffs were unlawful. The decision targeted tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), a 1977 law historically used for sanctions or asset freezes, not tariffs.
Trump, however, reacted strongly to the ruling, labeling the decision as “highly partisan” and vowing to appeal to the US Supreme Court. He insisted that his tariffs were critical for protecting US manufacturers, farmers, and workers, and warned that removing them would be a “total disaster” for the American economy.
The Court’s Ruling: Limits on Presidential Powers
The Appeals Court emphasized that Congress, not the President, holds the constitutional authority to impose taxes and tariffs. The judges clarified that IEEPA grants the President wide emergency powers but does not explicitly authorize imposing tariffs.
This decision invalidated Trump’s “reciprocal tariffs” introduced in April during his trade war, as well as February tariffs on China, Canada, and Mexico. However, tariffs on steel and aluminum, enacted under separate laws, remain intact.
Two lawsuits prompted this ruling:
-
A case filed by five small US businesses.
-
A lawsuit by 12 Democratic-led states challenging Trump’s interpretation of IEEPA.
The plaintiffs argued that Trump overstepped his authority, highlighting that Congress has exclusive power over taxation and trade duties.
Trump’s Response: “Tariffs Make America Strong”
In a fiery statement, Trump defended his policies, saying:
“Tariffs are the best tool to help our workers and support companies that produce great MADE IN AMERICA products. If these tariffs disappear, the US will become financially weak.”
He reiterated that his administration would take the fight to the Supreme Court to ensure the tariffs remain in place, presenting them as essential to reducing trade deficits and confronting unfair trade barriers from other nations.
Jake Sullivan’s Criticism: “US Brand in the Toilet”
Former US National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan launched a scathing critique of Trump’s aggressive tariff strategy, particularly the 50% tariffs on Indian imports, which include a 25% penalty for Russian oil purchases. The tariffs, effective since August 27, are already straining Washington’s relations with New Delhi.
Sullivan warned that Trump’s trade offensive is undermining years of bipartisan efforts to strengthen ties with India:
“Now you’ve got President Trump executing a massive trade offensive, and the Indians are saying they may need to hedge with Beijing.”
He argued that this policy has made the US look “unreliable” on the global stage, giving China an opportunity to project itself as a “responsible power.”
US-India Relations Under Strain
India, which has historically been a key US partner in balancing China’s influence in the Indo-Pacific, now faces heightened tariffs that could affect its exports and energy security. Analysts suggest this aggressive trade posture could push India closer to China, undermining strategic partnerships built over decades.
Former NSA John Bolton also criticized the administration’s approach, questioning why India faces steep penalties for Russian oil purchases while China faces no comparable sanctions. Bolton called Trump an “aberrational president,” warning that US-India relations are currently in a “very bad place.”
Implications for Global Trade and Geopolitics
Trump’s tariff policies, designed to reduce trade deficits, have escalated global trade tensions:
-
The ruling highlights legal constraints on presidential trade powers under US law.
-
India’s inclusion in the tariff list risks destabilizing one of Washington’s most important alliances.
-
China stands to benefit diplomatically, as several countries now see the US as a “disruptor” in international trade.
If Trump succeeds in reinstating these tariffs through the Supreme Court, it could redefine US trade policy and trigger retaliatory measures from key trading partners.
Conclusion: Tariffs as a Political and Legal Battleground
The Appeals Court ruling against Trump’s tariffs marks a major turning point in US trade policy. While Trump frames tariffs as a strategic shield for American industry, legal experts argue that he has overstepped constitutional limits.
For India and other global partners, the ongoing uncertainty over US trade policies signals a shift in Washington’s reliability as a trading ally. If unresolved, this could reshape international trade alignments and further strengthen China’s influence.
Comments
Post a Comment