Trump’s tariffs temporarily reinstated after appeals court issues stay


This recording was made using enhanced software.

Summary

Federal appeals court issues stay

A federal appeals court has temporarily paused a lower court ruling that struck down most of former President Trump’s tariffs, allowing them to remain in effect for now.

Lower court's previous ruling

The lower court had ruled the tariffs unlawful, saying Trump misused emergency powers for a trade issue that should be handled by Congress.

Case under review

The case is under review, with responses from both sides due in early June.


Full story

President Donald Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariffs can stay in effect, for now, after a federal appeals court temporarily paused a lower court’s decision that struck down most of the tariffs imposed. Trump placed tariffs on countries, including China, Canada, Mexico and others, using the International Emergency Economic Powers Act.

Lower court rules tariffs unlawful

A three-judge panel with the United States Court of International Trade ruled Wednesday that Trump’s tariffs are unlawful and the 10% reciprocal tariffs are too far-reaching. The court said what Trump called an “emergency” did not meet the legal definition under that law.

Instead, the court said it was really a trade issue rather than a national emergency, and Congress should handle that trade policy, not the president alone.

Appeals court grants temporary stay

However, the Trump administration requested that the federal appeals court step in and issue an injunction to stop the ruling from taking effect. The federal appeals court said the lower court’s judgment is “temporarily stayed,” meaning it is on hold while the court takes time to look over the case.

“The United States moves to consolidate its appeals from those rulings and has applied for this court to stay the judgment and injunction pending these appeals and for an immediate administrative stay while the court considers that motion,” the appeals court said in the order.

Timeline for responses set

The court told the plaintiffs, which include some U.S. businesses, that they have one week to respond to the administration’s request. After the plaintiffs respond, the Trump administration has until June 9 to reply.

“This is merely a procedural step as the court considers the government’s request for a longer stay pending appeal,” Jeffrey Schwab, a lawyer for the business plaintiffs, said in a statement, as reported by CNBC. “We are confident the Federal Circuit will ultimately deny the government’s motion shortly thereafter, recognizing the irreparable harm these tariffs inflict on our clients,” Schwab said.

White House responds to court involvement

Before the federal appeals court decision came down Thursday afternoon, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt posted to X, saying:

“America cannot function if President Trump has his sensitive diplomatic and trade negotiations derailed by activist judges. This judicial overreach must be stopped.”

The White House has not yet publicly responded to the ruling.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Why this story matters

A federal appeals court decision to temporarily allow President Trump's tariffs to remain in effect during ongoing legal challenges highlights a conflict over the legal limits of presidential authority in trade policy, with potential consequences for global commerce, domestic industries, and the balance of powers in U.S. government.

Presidential authority

Determining whether the president can unilaterally impose tariffs under emergency powers has implications for the separation of powers between the executive branch and Congress, as underscored by court decisions questioning if the International Emergency Economic Powers Act provides such authority (according to multiple news sources).

Trade policy impact

The continuation or reversal of these tariffs directly affects international trade relations, businesses, supply chains, and consumer prices, as reported by Reuters and Associated Press, with uncertainty influencing markets and negotiations with trading partners.

Legal uncertainty

The rapid sequence of conflicting court rulings injects notable ambiguity into the future of U.S. trade policy, creating challenges for businesses, foreign governments, and legislative oversight, as described by experts and business groups in AP and CNBC reports.

Get the big picture

Synthesized coverage insights across 204 media outlets

Community reaction

Business owners, particularly importers and small retailers, express frustration about the unpredictability of policy changes. The National Retail Federation and affected businesses highlight how rapidly changing tariff rulings complicate planning and can threaten survival. Local communities dependent on ports, trade, and related industries are feeling job and income pressure from both existing and potential tariffs.

Context corner

Historically, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) of 1977 had not been used to impose tariffs before President Trump invoked it. The power to set tariffs has traditionally belonged to Congress, though presidents have exercised increased authority over time, particularly during perceived emergencies. Previous use of emergency powers for tariffs has sparked debate about executive versus legislative authority.

Terms to know

– Tariff: A tax imposed on imported goods. – IEEPA: International Emergency Economic Powers Act (1977), used by the president to declare national economic emergencies affecting foreign transactions. – Reciprocity: The idea that US tariffs should match those imposed by trading partners. – Administrative Stay: A court order temporarily pausing the effect of a lower court’s decision.

Bias comparison

  • Media outlets on the left frame the reinstatement of Trump’s tariffs primarily as an executive overreach and a blow to small businesses, repeatedly emphasizing judicial checks on presidential authority with language like “overreach” and “fights court ruling,” conveying skepticism and caution.
  • Media outlets in the center mainly provide a measured legal and procedural overview, avoiding partisan diction.
  • Media outlets on the right highlight the court’s stay as a vindication of presidential power, employing assertive terms such as “BREAKING” and “restoration,” portraying tariffs as vital national security tools threatened by “activist judges,” which reveals a rhetorical strategy invoking judicial hostility and executive defense.

Media landscape

Click on bars to see headlines

357 total sources

Key points from the Left

  • The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit temporarily reinstated tariffs after a federal trade court voided them, the court announced on May 29, 2025.
  • Businesses challenging the tariffs have until June 5 to respond, and the administration must reply by June 9.
  • The White House criticized the judges for their ruling, with Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt stating, "These judges are threatening to undermine the credibility of the United States on the world stage."
  • A federal trade court previously ruled that the President exceeded his authority when imposing these tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, which led to the appeals process.

Report an issue with this summary

Key points from the Center

  • On May 29, 2025, a federal appeals court reinstated President Donald Trump's broad tariffs, originally implemented from April 2, which target a range of major trading partners such as China and the EU.
  • The reinstatement came after lawsuits filed by small businesses and 12 Democratic Attorneys General challenged President Trump’s use of emergency economic authority, arguing that he had overstepped the legal powers granted to him under the act enacted in 1977.
  • A day earlier, the Court of International Trade blocked the tariffs, determining that the power to levy tariffs lies exclusively with Congress and that the president's emergency powers do not extend to unlimited tariff imposition.
  • The appeals court lifted the trade court’s injunction without providing an explanation, while White House spokesman Kush Desai stated that decisions on managing a national emergency should not be made by unelected judges.
  • The ruling allows tariffs to continue temporarily amid ongoing appeals, creating legal uncertainty and maintaining concerns from economists about risks to U.S. trade policy and the economy.

Report an issue with this summary

Key points from the Right

  • The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has temporarily reinstated President Trump's tariffs while the appellate process occurs.
  • The Court of International Trade ruled that Trump did not have authority to impose tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, calling the tariffs illegal.
  • White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt stated that the administration will comply with the court order but will continue to fight the ruling, arguing it threatens economic well-being.
  • The plaintiffs must respond to the United States' motions by June 5, 2025, ensuring both sides provide necessary briefs in this legal battle.

Report an issue with this summary

Other (sources without bias rating):

Powered by Ground News™

Timeline

Timeline