A federal appeals court in Washington, D.C., ruled on Friday that Donald Trump exceeded his presidential powers with many of his tariff policies. The court’s 7-4 decision emphasized that while U.S. law grants the president significant authority to act during a declared national emergency, it does not explicitly include the power to impose tariffs or taxes.
The court stated that Trump’s tariffs are extensive in scope, amount, and duration, asserting authority beyond the limitations of the law his administration referenced. This ruling marks a significant challenge to Trump’s trade policies and suggests that the Supreme Court may need to decide whether he has the legal right to alter U.S. trade policy. The decision will not take effect until October 14.
In response to the ruling, Trump asserted via social media that all tariffs remain in place and alleged political bias from the appeals court. He described the ruling as potentially harmful to the country and reiterated his stance that tariffs serve as an essential tool for American workers and manufacturers.
The ruling invalidates Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariffs, which imposed a 10% baseline on nearly all U.S. trading partners, as well as his reciprocal tariffs against countries he deems unfair. Trump has claimed authority to impose these tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), which allows the president to regulate international transactions during a national emergency. His administration cited several emergencies, including trade deficits and fentanyl trafficking, as justifications for these actions.
However, small business groups argued that the tariffs are detrimental to their operations. The appeals court remarked that it is unlikely Congress intended for the IEEPA to grant the president unlimited authority over tariffs and noted that the law lacks specific provisions regarding tariffs.
White House spokesperson Kush Desai maintained that Trump exercised his tariff powers legally, and the administration is preparing for further legal challenges. The appeals court’s ruling highlights a distinction between statutory language explicitly granting tariff authority, which is absent in the IEEPA, and laws that clearly define such powers.
Source: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/aug/29/trump-tariffs-illegal-appeal-court-ruling