Appeals court blocks some Trump tariffs, but order not effective until October


Summary

Federal appeals court blocks tariffs

A federal appeals court ruled that President Donald Trump improperly imposed two sets of import tariffs using emergency powers.

'Congressional power'

The court wrote that “The core Congressional power to impose taxes such as tariffs is vested exclusively in the legislative branch by the Constitution.”

Trump administration to appeal

Tariffs will go through until October as the federal government appeals the ruling.


Full story

A federal appeals court on Friday said President Donald Trump improperly invoked emergency powers when imposing some sets of import tariffs in a 7-4 decision. Still, the tariffs will be allowed to go through until October, per the order.

United States Attorney General Pam Bondi confirmed on X The Justice Department “will appeal this decision and continue to fight to restore the president’s lawful authority.”

Tariffs and trade deals

Trump, in April, officially enacted the tariffs on what he called “Liberation Day.” He had already put tariffs on China, Mexico and Canada. 

Those were later suspended for 90 days so the United States’ trading partners could negotiate with American officials to prevent larger tariffs.

QR code for SAN app download

Download the SAN app today to stay up-to-date with Unbiased. Straight Facts™.

Point phone camera here

While some countries were able to come to a trade deal, others were not. 

To impose these tariffs, Trump used the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act and declared America’s trade deficits a national emergency. He’d previously argued the situation at the border constituted a national emergency as well, and used that to justify what he called “trafficking tariffs” on Mexico, China and Canada from February.

Five small businesses and 12 states filed lawsuits over the tariffs.

What did Friday’s ruling say?

In their Friday ruling, the federal appeals court said “it seems unlikely that Congress intended, in enacting IEEPA, to depart from its past practice and grant the President unlimited authority to impose tariffs.”

“The statute neither mentions tariffs (or any of its synonyms) nor has procedural safeguards that contain clear limits on the President’s power to impose tariffs,” the court said in its majority decision.

In addition, the majority wrote, “the core Congressional power to impose taxes such as tariffs is vested exclusively in the legislative branch by the Constitution; when Congress delegates this power in the first instance, it does so clearly and unambiguously.”

The Associated Press noted that the United States Court of International Trade in New York also said in May that Trump’s Liberation Day tariffs “exceed any authority granted to the President’’ by the IEEPA.

On Friday, Trump posted on social media that “tariffs are still in effect,” adding if they went away completely, it would be “a total disaster for our country.”

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said in a statement to the court on Friday that not allowing Trump’s tariffs would lead to “dangerous diplomatic embarrassment” and interrupt negotiations.

Meanwhile, the plaintiff’s attorney Neal Kaytal called the court’s ruling a “a win for the American Constitution” in an interview with CNN anchor Jake Tapper. 

“It’s a win for the American Constitution, that our founders basically said that decisions that are major over things like taxation have to be done by the Congress, not by the president and the stroke of his pen,” Katyal said. ”I think the court overwhelmingly today, in a 7-4 decision, rejected President Trump’s notion that he can do whatever he wants whenever he wants.”

According to the AP, the court order does not cover Trump tariffs on foreign steel, aluminum and automobiles or ones the president set in his first term. 

Tags: ,

SAN provides
Unbiased. Straight Facts.

Don’t just take our word for it.


Certified balanced reporting

According to media bias experts at AllSides

AllSides Certified Balanced May 2025

Transparent and credible

Awarded a perfect reliability rating from NewsGuard

100/100

Welcome back to trustworthy journalism.

Find out more

Why this story matters

A federal appeals court ruling challenges President Donald Trump's use of emergency powers for tariffs, raising questions about the separation of powers and the limits of presidential authority in setting the United States' economic policy.

Presidential authority

The court decision addresses whether the president can use emergency powers to impose tariffs, highlighting the balance between executive actions and Congressional oversight.

Separation of powers

The ruling emphasizes Constitutional boundaries, noting that the power to impose tariffs and taxes resides with Congress, not the president, as underscored in the court’s majority opinion.

Trade and economic policy

The case involves tariffs that affect international trade and negotiations, influencing U.S. relationships with trading partners and potentially impacting the broader economy, according to statements from government and business representatives.

Get the big picture

Behind the numbers

Tariff revenue reportedly reached $159 billion by July, more than double the previous year according to multiple sources. Experts warn that if the tariffs are overturned the United States may need to refund paid duties, which could create a revenue shortfall.

Context corner

The International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977 was designed for national emergencies typically involving sanctions, not tariffs. Historically, Congress holds the exclusive power to set tariffs but has delegated some authority to the President in limited situations.

Global impact

Affected countries such as China, India and Canada face uncertainty over U.S. trade policy and several global trade deals may be revisited. The tariffs' volatility has caused disruptions and price fluctuations in international markets.

SAN provides
Unbiased. Straight Facts.

Don’t just take our word for it.


Certified balanced reporting

According to media bias experts at AllSides

AllSides Certified Balanced May 2025

Transparent and credible

Awarded a perfect reliability rating from NewsGuard

100/100

Welcome back to trustworthy journalism.

Find out more

Bias comparison

  • Media outlets on the left frame the court ruling against President Donald Trump’s tariffs as a decisive rebuke of what they label an “illegal overreach” of emergency powers, emphasizing constitutional limits and painting the tariffs as a “crushing blow” to the economy, often mocking Trump’s defiant rhetoric with sarcastic references likening him to a “king” or “omnipotent God-Emperor.”
  • Not enough unique coverage from media outlets in the center to provide a bias comparison.
  • Media outlets on the right acknowledges the court’s finding of illegality, but stresses what they say are the tariffs’ necessity for national security and economic protection, portraying the ruling as an erroneous curtailment of presidential authority that risks “financial ruin” and weakens trade leverage.

Media landscape

Click on bars to see headlines

201 total sources

Key points from the Left

No summary available because of a lack of coverage.

Report an issue with this summary

Key points from the Center

No summary available because of a lack of coverage.

Report an issue with this summary

Key points from the Right

No summary available because of a lack of coverage.

Report an issue with this summary

Other (sources without bias rating):

Powered by Ground News™

Daily Newsletter

Start your day with fact-based news

Start your day with fact-based news

Learn more about our emails. Unsubscribe anytime.

By entering your email, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and acknowledge the Privacy Policy.