Tariffs on, tariffs off, tariffs on …
Trump’s tariffs are back in place – temporarily:
A federal appeals court has overruled an activist decision from earlier this week to allow President Donald Trump’s tariffs to stay in place — at least for now.
Once again, this is not yet a ruling on the merits. Rather, it is a procedural ruling that places the lower court decision on hold pending disposition of the case on appeal, currently before the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals.
How can a president conduct foreign trade negotiations under such circumstances? I believe this case, like so many others, will end up being decided by SCOTUS.
As usual, Jonathan Turley has some words that elucidate the matter. This is a fairly short clip, and I think you’ll probably find it at least somewhat reassuring:
Speaking of court decisions affecting Trump, SCOTUS has ruled in Trump’s favor on his suspension of Biden’s parole program for illegal aliens, lifting a stay on his suspension of the program for now:
The Supreme Court granted President Donald Trump’s administration a stay on an order forcing it not to revoke protections given to illegal aliens through former President Joe Biden’s parole program.
Justices Ketanji Brown Jackson and Sonia Sotomayor dissented.
The majority did not elaborate on its decision, but once again, Jackson wrote a long dissent.
In April, U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani of the United States District Court – District of Massachusetts blocked Trump from ending the parole program, giving over 500,000 illegal aliens parole and the right to work.
The program applied to those from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela.
Whether it’s tariffs or how to handle illegals or the tying of federal funding to federal policy, they can’t keep saying that it’s only wrong when Trump does it but it was okay when any other President did it. “Trump / not-Trump” is not a valid legal principle.
Cast your eye over past uses of IEEPA going back to 1979. Some of these are still active, and actually ban certain countries from trading with the US at all. If it can be used to ban trade or certain transactions entirely, how can it not be used to impose a tariff on them? That does not make much sense.
Maybe that should be his next move: ban something he had a tariff on before. Maybe that’s why the injunction was stayed, since the judges knew that perfectly well.
The tariff issues are complex, many-faceted, and hard to police.
I have read That tariff avoidance has become a business in itself.
“In the ever-evolving landscape of global trade, companies are finding creative ways to navigate the complex web of tariffs and trade barriers. One such strategy, known as “tariff engineering,” has emerged as a popular method for businesses to circumvent U.S. tariffs and maintain competitiveness in the global market.”
https://us.atoshipping.com/the-not-so-secret-way-to-bypass-u-s-tariffs/
I understand Trump’s desire to even the playing field in trade, and his desire to accomplish as much as possible before the mid-terms. The anti-Trump forces want to slow him down with lawfare, hoping they can regain control of the House in 2026. It’s going to be a bruising battle. And in the end, neither side may be better off.
I wish Trump had concentrated on getting the economy moving and inflation down to ensure a victory in the House in 26. Then he could have taken on the tariffs in a more orderly fashion. But that’s wishful thinking. So, I’m hoping that SCOTUS will get with it and slow\stop the lawfare. Otherwise, the unfinished tariff business will be a big issue in 2026.
Our judges are trash.
You mean the possum congress, that has offered up this pitiful effort, disdaining Elon’s effort, which has not really acted to enact the reforms, at State, and other agencies, like edwin starr might have paraphrased ‘what is a Congress good for,
the Senate has been even more like a Galapagos turtle,
when the Camarilla was in charge, with a tie vote, the Congress did much damage to the body politic, and that’s being charitable,
many of these same senators have been reluctant to reverse these steps,
So let’s see now…
“Trump’s Tariffs Deliver Record $23 Billion Revenue In May”—
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/trumps-tariffs-deliver-record-23-billion-revenue-may
“Farewell, Fugazy!”—
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/farewell-fugazy
NO! NO! NO! THE ABOVE SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO STAND.
Sigh. (Though one might well agree if one is a Democrat or in sympathy with the destructive goals of that pernicious party…which was, alas, so close, so close, so, so close to achieving its odious dream…. Not to worry, though: they’ll be getting plenty of other chances to “SAVE OUR DEMOCRACY”….)