The Lawfare Podcast Lawfare Daily: Two Courts Rule Against Trump’s IEEPA Tariffs, with Peter Harrell
6 snips
Jun 3, 2025 In this engaging discussion, Peter Harrell, a sanctions expert and Contributing Editor at Lawfare, joins Scott R. Anderson to analyze two recent court rulings that block President Trump’s tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. They delve into the legal intricacies of these rulings, the executive authority over tariffs, and potential outcomes on appeal. The conversation also touches on the broader implications for future U.S. trade policy and the evolving relationship between Congress and the presidency regarding economic powers.
AI Snips
Chapters
Transcript
Episode notes
IEPA Does Not Authorize Tariffs
- The core litigation question is whether IEPA authorizes tariffs at all.
- Judge Contreras concluded IEPA does not authorize tariffs, enabling district court jurisdiction over tariff challenges.
Yoshida Case's Limited Precedent
- The 1975 Yoshida case upheld Nixon's 10% tariff under a predecessor statute similar to IEPA.
- Judge Contreras distinguished Yoshida because Congress passed a specific statute in 1974 limiting tariff authority after Nixon's tariffs.
CIT Differentiates Tariff Types
- The Court of International Trade differentiated between trade deficit tariffs and trafficking tariffs.
- It held trade deficit tariffs unlawful under IEPA due to 1974 statutes and trafficking tariffs unrelated to the declared emergency threat.