WASHINGTON (AP) – Once again, President Donald Trump’s most significant policy initiative has been halted.
On Wednesday, a powerful yet ambiguous courthouse in New York denied Trump’s most extreme tariff legal foundation, ruling that he failed to provide adequate justification for a series of import taxes that disrupted the global economy by declaring a state of emergency over trade imbalances and fentanyl trafficking. The executive action taken to sort out the global economy was seen as an unconstitutional overreach of parliamentary powers.
This setback aligns with a broader trend for the president, who has adopted a broad interpretation of enforcement. Federal courts have criticized his actions for their lack of Due Process, including some of Trump’s deportation efforts. His proposed income tax is currently being debated in Congress, preventing some of his aspirations for permanence. Additionally, his attempts at Harvard University and reducing the federal workforce have faced legal challenges. Trump also finds himself at odds with reality, as his promise to swiftly end the conflicts in Ukraine and Gaza has devolved into a prolonged struggle.
The laws of political gravity, the separation of powers, and the realities of geopolitics have proven more challenging for Trump to navigate than he openly acknowledges. As various legal battles unfold, he may need to decide whether to accept the limits of his authority or dismiss the judicial system altogether.
“In that latter case, there may be a constitutional crisis,” remarked HW Brand, a history professor at the University of Texas.
Following a second federal court ruling on Thursday deeming Trump’s tariffs inappropriate, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt expressed optimism for a judicial appeal, although officials have indicated they are considering alternative legislation to uphold the tariffs. The appeals court stated on Thursday that the government could continue collecting tariffs under the Emergency Powers Act for the time being as the Trump administration challenges the ruling; however, they would be required to refund the tariffs if the ruling stands.
Kevin Hassett, director of the White House National Economic Council, has two baseball caps displayed in the room behind the Oval Office with the phrase “Trump always wins,” and Trump claims he is “right” about everything.
“Trump always wins these negotiations because we’re right,” Hassett told Fox Business Network’s Morning with Maria. “These activist judges are trying to slow things down in the midst of crucial negotiations.”
A significant part of Trump’s challenge stems from the nature of his work; only the most severe problems reach his desk. Moreover, his keen instincts regarding what performs well on television do not always align with the intricacies of policy detail.
Trump may have circumvented both Congress and the wider public by unilaterally imposing tariffs, deportations, and other actions, potentially giving his policy decisions a facade of legitimacy, according to Julian Zelizer, a history professor at Princeton University.
“The President is attempting to realize his objectives outside the normal legal frameworks without considering public approval,” Zelizer explained. “The issue is that we have a constitutional system with limits on what the president can accomplish, and the courts have the authority to say no. Many of his most audacious decisions rest on an incredibly tenuous foundation.”
His tariffs are intended to address what Trump perceives as the real issues. His “liberation date” tax on imports seeks to rectify the enduring trade imbalance with other nations, while his baseline tariff of 10% is designed to generate revenue to alleviate the trillions in federal debt incurred by his proposed tax cuts.
However, when financial markets became volatile and interest on U.S. debt surged, Trump reduced his tariff rate to 10% and adjusted strategies as negotiations progressed.
Treasury Secretary Scott Bescent hinted that this was a tactic to stimulate new trade negotiations. Yet, Trump has quickly diminished that argument, claiming he has backed down due to pressures from the financial markets.
Trump remains firm on tariffs related to automobiles, steel, and aluminum under national security arguments outlined in Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962. While he could invoke other laws to initiate new investigations or temporarily impose tariffs, the current focus of the White House remains on contesting judicial decisions.
“What’s unprecedented is Trump’s reliance on a 1977 law that hasn’t been utilized for tariffs since the 1930s—not merely for targeting tariffs, but tariffs in general. That’s both unusual and unprecedented,” Harrell commented.
Harrell noted that while Trump could reintroduce many tariffs using different laws, “it would necessitate more effort and result in a much more orderly process.”
Douglas Brinkley, a history professor at Rice University, pointed out that Trump’s interpretation of the presidency is grounded in a significant misunderstanding of the role. He wrongly assumes that tariffs used in the 19th century can sustain a much larger federal government today. Additionally, he seems to believe that power is derived solely from him rather than from established institutions or the rule of law.
“He appears oblivious to the fact that disregarding a court order equates to anti-American rhetoric,” Brinkley remarked. “I tell others that he operates as if he is greater than the American Constitution, viewing judges as mere subordinates.”
The Trump White House has criticized the recent ruling from the U.S. International Trade Court.
White House trade advisor Peter Navarro stated in an interview with Bloomberg News that the judiciary is part of the problem, arguing that Trump has been thwarted in fulfilling his promises.
“Certain courts in this country seem to be engaged in attacks on Americans,” Navarro asserted. “The president has taken measures to combat fentanyl addiction and halt unfair international trade practices that threaten our factories and jobs, yet the courts persist in obstructing these efforts.”
Source: apnews.com