US EditionMost Trump tariffs are not legal, US appeals court rules
- A federal appeals court in Washington ruled on August 29, 2025, that President Trump improperly used emergency powers to impose sweeping tariffs but allowed them to remain until October 14.
- The ruling comes in response to a lawsuit brought by Democratic-led states and small businesses opposing tariffs that Trump imposed using emergency powers from a 1977 law not originally intended to authorize such trade measures.
- The court clarified that only Congress has the constitutional authority to levy tariffs and taxes, rejecting the argument that IEEPA grants the president broad or unchecked power to impose tariffs.
- Plaintiff's attorney Neal Kaytal described the ruling as a victory for the American Constitution, emphasizing that major decisions like taxation should be made by Congress rather than the president unilaterally. Meanwhile, Trump posted on Truth Social warning that if the ruling is upheld, it would cause catastrophic harm to the United States.
- The decision delays tariff enforcement changes until mid-October, allowing the administration to appeal to the Supreme Court, while global trade remains unsettled and trading partners face uncertainty.
181 Articles
181 Articles
Activist Post
Mish Talk - Global Economic Trend AnalysisFull Appeals Court Rules 7-4 Against Trump’s Reciprocal Tariffs
In a very much expected (by me) ruling, the appeals court rejects Trump’s global tariffs. Trump Supreme Court Appeal Coming It’s not over yet, but the Wall Street Journal reports Appeals Court Rejects Trump’s Global Tariffs. A federal appeals court late Friday struck down the Trump administration’s signature tariffs, finding that the president had gone too far in his use of emergency powers to rewrite U.S. trade policy. The 7-4 ruling from the …
Donald Trump’s favorite trade, economic and political weapon for international relations has been jammed. A federal appeal court decided Friday night that most of the tariffs imposed by the U.S. president since he returned to the White House are illegal. These are the keys to what happened and the scenario that opens up after the judicial setback to the U.S. billionaire. ‘No taxation without representation’ (’No to unrepresented taxes’). This po…
Coverage Details
Bias Distribution
- 38% of the sources are Center
Factuality
To view factuality data please Upgrade to Premium
