WSJ Opinion: Potomac Watch Donald Trump’s 'Emergency' Tariffs Lose Again in Court
9 snips
Sep 2, 2025 A recent federal appeals court ruled that Trump's global tariffs were imposed unlawfully, sparking a debate on presidential authority. The ruling raises questions about how future administrations could interpret emergency powers, potentially leading to controversial tariffs. The discussion delves into the economic impact on consumers and small businesses versus larger corporations. As the White House plans to appeal, eyes are on the Supreme Court's upcoming decision, which could reshape the legal landscape of trade policy.
AI Snips
Chapters
Transcript
Episode notes
Court Finds IEPA Tariffs Beyond Executive Power
- The Federal Circuit held Trump's IEPA-based global tariffs exceed delegated authority and violate the major questions doctrine.
- The court viewed broad, high, and indefinite tariffs as beyond IEPA's regulatory scope and akin to taxation reserved for Congress.
Regulation Isn’t A Blank Check For Tariffs
- The court distinguished 'regulate' from 'tax' and treated tariffs as a constitutional taxing power of Congress.
- The major questions doctrine requires clear congressional authorization for actions with large economic or political significance.
Major Questions Doctrine Cuts Both Ways
- The major questions doctrine has been used across ideologies, including to limit executive action on student loan forgiveness.
- Courts demand clearer statutory text when executive acts have huge economic consequences.