The trade wars they’re a rollicking. Wrong word to use considering the terrible impact on countless lives across the globe, but Trump’s drum rolls, China’s bugle call, d(r)eadlocks elsewhere and now the caveat by the US Court of International Trade has hurled perhaps the most significant legal challenge as it temporarily reinstated the President’s sweeping tariffs.
What does this unprecedented judicial intervention mean for this superpower’s economic policies? How is this constitutional crisis over presidential trade powers that could reshape American economic policy for decades, likely to play out?
Federal courts have begun dismantling the President's ambitious tariff programme as a federal appeals court temporarily reinstated the sweeping tariffs by US President Donald Trump ruling that he had exceeded his authority in imposing the duties and ordered an immediate block on them.
The legal battle centres on the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), which Trump has used extensively to justify his tariff regime. A three-judge panel at the US Court of International Trade concluded that an emergency statute invoked by the White House does not grant the unilateral power to impose tariffs on nearly all countries. The court's ruling represents a fundamental challenge to the executive branch's interpretation of emergency powers in trade policy.
The immediate aftermath has been chaotic, with markets responding volatilely to the legal uncertainty whilst businesses scramble to understand the implications.
Not likely to take it lying down, the Trump administration lodged an appeal against the ruling shortly after it was announced mid last week, setting the stage for a prolonged legal battle that could ultimately reach the Supreme Court, determining the constitutional boundaries of presidential authority in international commerce.