Unelected judges just threw a wrench into President Donald Trump’s bold tariff plan. On Wednesday, the Court of International Trade in New York ruled that the global tariffs enacted under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act are flat-out illegal, as ABC News reports. The ruling claims the president overstepped his authority, and now the administration is scrambling to hit pause.
The court’s decision strikes down tariffs Trump slapped on over 50 countries back in April. A three-judge panel, including appointees from Presidents Barack Obama, Trump, and Ronald Reagan, ruled that the tariffs don’t meet the “extraordinary threat” threshold required to bypass Congress. This isn’t just a legal slap; it’s a direct challenge to executive power.
Congress, not the White House, typically holds the reins on tariffs, the judges argued. They called Trump’s use of emergency powers “unbounded” and lacking any real justification. Apparently, trade deficits, a decades-old issue, don’t qualify as a national crisis in their book.
“The President’s assertion of tariff-making authority … exceeds any tariff authority delegated,” the judges wrote. Nice try, but since when do courts get to micromanage foreign policy? The administration fired back, warning of “irreparable harm” to national security if the ruling stands.
The Department of Justice didn’t waste any time, requesting a stay on Thursday to keep the tariffs alive. DOJ lawyers argued that halting the policy midstream would cripple delicate diplomatic efforts. Sounds like judges are playing armchair generals with America’s global standing.
“It is not for unelected judges to decide how to address a national emergency,” White House spokesman Kush Desai said. He’s got a point -- courts aren’t elected to run the country. Yet here they are, dictating terms on a policy aimed at protecting American interests.
The Trump team has already filed an appeal, taking the fight to the Federal Circuit. The administration is also pushing for a stay to keep the tariffs in place while the case unfolds. With national security on the line, Trump officials are not about to let this ruling slide.
This legal showdown stems from two cases: one initiated by small businesses and another filed by 12 Democrat state attorneys general. The businesses’ lawsuit called Trump’s emergency claim a “figment of his imagination.” Clever rhetoric, but it dismisses the real-world stakes of global trade imbalances.
“A win for the rule of law and for Nevadans’ pocketbooks,” Nevada Attorney General Aaron Ford crowed in response to the ruling. Pocketbooks? Tell that to the workers whose jobs these tariffs were designed to shield from foreign competition.
Ford didn’t stop there. “The president had no legal authority to impose these tariffs, and his unlawful actions would have caused billions of dollars of damage,” he said. Funny how he ignores the billions lost to unfair trade practices that prompted Trump’s move in the first place.
New York Attorney General Letitia James piled on, calling the ruling a “major victory” for American jobs. “These tariffs are a massive tax hike on working families,” she claimed. Yet she’s silent on how unchecked imports hammer those same families’ livelihoods.
The small businesses’ lawyer, Jeffrey Schwab, waxed poetic during a May 13 hearing. “It’s a wild pitch and hits the backstop,” he said, arguing the tariffs were legally off-base. Cute, but metaphors don’t change the fact that trade deficits aren’t just numbers -- they’re jobs.
This marks the first time a federal court has directly tackled the legality of Trump’s tariffs. A 1970s case gave presidents tariff powers under a different law, but the IEEPA’s limits are now front and center. No wonder the administration is fighting tooth and nail.
At least six lawsuits have challenged Trump’s tariff authority, showing this is no small skirmish. A Trump-nominated judge in Florida hinted the president might have the power but punted the case to New York. Now, the Federal Circuit will have the final say—unless it drags on further.
For now, the tariffs are in limbo, and so is America’s trade strategy. The court’s overreach could embolden global competitors, delighted to see the U.S. hobbled by its judges. Turns out, actions have consequences -- especially when unelected elites play umpire.
