The Dictatorship
Trump has other tariff options after Supreme Court strikes down his worldwide import taxes
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump still has options to keep taxing imports aggressively even after the Supreme Court struck down the tariffs he imposed last year on nearly every country on earth.
The Justices didn’t buy the president’s sweeping claims of authority to impose tariffs as he sees fit. But Trump can re-use tariff powers he deployed in his first term and can reach for others, including one that dates back to the Great Depression.
“Their decision is incorrect,” Trump said Friday, calling the Supreme Court justices who ruled against his tariffs “fools and lapdogs” during a press conference. “But it doesn’t matter because we have very powerful alternatives.”
Indeed, the president has already said he will impose a 10% global tariff under a trade law that allows such duties for 150 days. After that, they can only be extended by Congress.
Trump also said he would use a range of other laws and regulations to impose new tariffs, though most of those statutes would require a legal process before duties could be imposed. And he pointed to his ability to use licenses to restrain imports, but offered few details.
Trump had claimed nearly boundless authority to impose tariffs under 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). But opponents argued before the Supreme Court that that power wasn’t necessary because Congress delegated tariff power to the White House in several other statutes — though it carefully limited the ways the president could use the authority.
Tariffs have been a cornerstone of Trump’s foreign and economic policy in his second term, with double-digit “reciprocal” tariffs imposed on most countries, which he has justified by declaring America’s longstanding trade deficits a national emergency.
The average U.S. tariff has gone from 2.5% when Trump returned to the White House in January to nearly 17% a year later, the highest since 1934, according to calculations by Yale University’s Budget Lab.
The president acted alone even though the U.S. Constitution specifically gives the power to tax – and impose tariffs – to Congress.
“The Good News is that there are methods, practices, Statutes, and other Authorities, as recognized by the entire Court and Congress, that are even stronger than the IEEPA TARIFFS, available to me as President of the United States of America,” Trump posted on his social media site.
Countering unfair trade practices
The United States has long had a handy cudgel to wallop countries it accuses of engaging in “unjustifiable,” “unreasonable” or “discriminatory” trade practices. That is Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974.
And Trump has made aggressive use of it himself — especially against China. In his first term, he cited Section 301 to impose sweeping tariffs on Chinese imports in a dispute over the sharp-elbowed tactics that Beijing was using to challenge America’s technological dominance. The U.S. is also using 301 powers to counter what it calls unfair Chinese practices in the shipbuilding industry.
There are no limits on the size of Section 301 tariffs. They expire after four years but can be extended.
But the administration’s trade representative must conduct an investigation and typically hold a public hearing before imposing 301 tariffs. On Friday, Trump also said the administration would initiate several more Section 301 investigations.
Experts have said Section 301 is useful in taking on China. But it has drawbacks when it comes to dealing with the smaller countries that Trump has hammered with reciprocal tariffs.
“Undertaking dozens and dozens of 301 investigations of all of those countries is a laborious process,” Veroneau said.
Targeting trade deficits
In striking down Trump’s reciprocal tariffs in May, the U.S. Court of International Trade ruled that the president couldn’t use emergency powers to combat trade deficits.
That is partly because Congress had specifically given the White House limited authority to address the problem in another statute: Section 122, also of the Trade Act of 1974. That allows the president to impose tariffs of up to 15% for up to 150 days in response to unbalanced trade. The administration doesn’t even have to conduct an investigation beforehand.
But Section 122 authority has never been used to apply tariffs, and there is some uncertainty about how it would work.
Protecting national security
In both of his terms, Trump has made aggressive use of his power — under Section 232 of Trade Expansion Act of 1962 — to impose tariffs on imports that he deems a threat to national security.
In 2018, he slapped tariffs on foreign steel and aluminum, levies he’s expanded since returning to the White House. He also plastered Section 232 tariffs on autos, auto parts, copper, lumber.
In September, the president even levied Section 232 tariffs on kitchen cabinets, bathroom vanities and upholstered furniture.
Section 232 tariffs are not limited by law but do require an investigation by the U.S. Commerce Department. It’s the administration itself that does the investigating – also true for Section 301 cases — “so they have a lot of control over the outcome,” Veroneau said.
Reviving Depression-era tariffs
Nearly a century ago, with the U.S. and world economies in collapse, Congress passed the Tariff Act of 1930, imposing hefty taxes on imports. Known as the Smoot-Hawley tariffs (for their congressional sponsors), these levies have been widely condemned by economists and historians for limiting world commerce and making the Great Depression worse. They also got a memorable pop culture shoutout in the 1986 movie “Ferris Bueller’s Day Off.”
Section 338 of the law authorizes the president to impose tariffs of up to 50% on imports from countries that have discriminated against U.S. businesses. No investigation is required, and there’s no limit on how long the tariffs can stay in place.
Those tariffs have never been imposed — U.S. trade negotiators traditionally have favored Section 301 sanctions instead — though the United States used the threat of them as a bargaining chip in trade talks in the 1930s.
In September, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told Reuters that the administration was considering Section 338 as a Plan B if the Supreme Court ruled against Trump’s use of emergency powers tariffs.
____
Associated Press Staff Writer Lindsay Whitehurst contributed to this story.
As President Donald Trump weighs a second major military assault on Iran in less than a year, congressional Democrats are warning a president known for pushing the boundaries of his executive power against unilaterally waging war on the Middle Eastern country.
Rep. Debbie Wassermann Schultz, D-Fla., said Saturday that Trump “must consult with Congress” and make a clear case for why Iran poses an imminent threat to the United States that would warrant U.S. military action. She pointed to the fact that former President George W. Bush sought congressional authorization before he ordered the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003.
“We have not seen anything about an imminent threat that would necessitate a significant strike like this,” Wasserman Schultz said on MS NOW’s “Alex Witt Reports.”
“So to think that this would be a walk in the park, the president is really not thinking this through carefully, and needs to consult with Congress,” she said.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said in a statement on Friday that the Trump administration has not clarified its strategy or objectives — or solicited congressional approval — as it weighs launching a military campaign against Iran.
“Congress has the sole power to declare war,” Schumer said. “We must enforce the War Powers Act and compel this administration to consult with Congress and explain to the American people the objectives and exactly why he is risking more American lives.”
Trump acknowledged on Friday that he is considering limited military strikes to push Tehran into agreeing to end its nuclear enrichment.
“I guess I can say I am considering that,” Trump told reporters amid a massive buildup of U.S. military forces in the Middle East, including two aircraft carriers and dozens of fighter jets, poised within striking distance of Iran.
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi told MS NOW’s “Morning Joe” on Friday that there is “no military solution for Iran’s nuclear program.” Trump on Thursday warned “bad things will happen” if Iran does not agree to a nuclear deal.
“The only solution is diplomacy,” Araghchi said. “This is why the U.S. is back at the table of negotiation and is seeking a deal. And we are prepared for that.”
Although he is unlikely to face much resistance from congressional Republicans, Democrats have cautioned against striking Iran. Sen. Jack Reed of Rhode Island, the ranking member on the Senate Armed Services Committee, warned of wider implications.
“A preemptive attack against Iran at this time would be a strategic misstep, and I am concerned that such recklessness could spark an uncontrolled conflict,” Reed said in a statement.
The administration has “failed to engage with Congress during this latest military build-up,” he added. “It is easy to start a war; finishing one is much harder.”
Clarissa-Jan Lim is a breaking news reporter for MS NOW. She was previously a senior reporter and editor at BuzzFeed News.
President Donald Trump said Saturday he is raising global tariffs to 15% from the 10% import tax he imposed the day before in response to the Supreme Court’s ruling striking down his sweeping tariffs.
“Based on a thorough, detailed, and complete review of the ridiculous, poorly written, and extraordinarily anti-American decision on Tariffs issued yesterday, after MANY months of contemplation, by the United States Supreme Court, please let this statement serve to represent that I, as President of the United States of America, will be, effective immediately, raising the 10% Worldwide Tariff on Countries, many of which have been ‘ripping’ the U.S. off for decades, without retribution (until I came along!), to the fully allowed, and legally tested, 15% level,” he wrote on Truth Social.
Trump had initially set the global tariffs at 10% in an executive order on Friday evening. Those tariffs, enacted under section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, are in effect for 150 days unless Congress approves its extension.
On Saturday, he upped that figure to 15%. The sudden increase was met with immediate criticism from both sides of the aisle.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., called it a “dumb” move. “He’s just making it up as he goes and Americans pay the price,” Schumer said on X.
“Trump’s commitment to pickpocketing the American people is relentless,” House Ways and Means Committee Democrats wrote on X. “A little over 24 hours after his tariffs were ruled illegal, he’s doing anything he can to make sure he can still jack up your costs.”
Scott Lincicome, vice president of general economics at the right-leaning CATO Institute, wrote“Clearly, this is all a very legitimate and rigorous ‘balance of payments’ remedy under the statute here. Yet another reason why congress needs to reform the law.”
Trump has been seething over the Supreme Court’s decision to invalidate the tariffs he imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. Three conservative justices — Neil Gorsuch, Amy Coney Barrett and Chief Justice John Roberts — sided with their liberal colleagues in the ruling, which The Wall Street Journal’s conservative editorial board called “a monumental vindication of the Constitution’s separation of powers.”
At a news conference on Friday, Trump said he was “ashamed of certain members of the court” and accused the justices of being “unpatriotic and disloyal to our Constitution.” He claimed without providing evidence that the court was “swayed by foreign interests and a political movement that is far smaller than people would ever think.”
He singled out Gorsuch and Barrett, two of his appointees to the high court, in a post on Truth Social later that day, saying that they “vote against the Republicans, and never against themselves, almost every single time, no matter how good a case we have.”
He then continued his streak into Saturday morning, lavishing praise on the conservative justices who disagreed with the majority decision.
“My new hero is United States Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh and, of course, Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito,” Trump wrote. “There is no doubt in anyone’s mind that they want to, MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!”
The additional 5% increase on the tariffs he hastily imposed on Saturday could further shake global markets, which have been rattled by the president’s unpredictable tariff threats.
The Supreme Court ruling raised more uncertainty for consumerswho were left wondering whether they might be reimbursed for all the extra money they paid for goods and products over the past year.
While the court didn’t explicitly address reimbursement, Kavanaugh did in his dissent, saying, “Refunds of billions of dollars would have significant consequences for the U.S. Treasury. The Court says nothing today about whether, and if so how, the Government should go about returning the billions of dollars that it has collected from importers.”
Clarissa-Jan Lim is a breaking news reporter for MS NOW. She was previously a senior reporter and editor at BuzzFeed News.
Almost immediately after federal judges in the Eastern District of Virginia on Friday appointed a veteran litigator as interim U.S. attorney, a position previously held by Lindsey HalliganDeputy Attorney General Todd Blanche shut it down.
James Hundley, a defense attorney with more than 35 years of experience, was unanimously appointed to serve as the top federal prosecutor in the Eastern District of Virginia on Friday afternoon.
But shortly after Hundley’s appointment, Blanche sounded off on social media.
“Here we go again. EDVA judges do not pick our US Attorney. POTUS does,” Blanche wrote in a post on X.“James Hundley, you’re fired!”
The top prosecutor position in the powerful Virginia office has been vacant since Halligan — an insurance lawyer personally chosen by President Donald Trump to pursue criminal charges against his perceived political rivals in the role — stepped down last month, after she was chewed out by two federal judges over her unlawful appointment.
Federal judges can appoint a U.S. attorney if a nominee has not been confirmed within 120 days. Justice Department officials have maintained, however, that it should be up to Trump to make those appointments.
Hundley is not the first casualty of the administration’s assertion of authority over the appointment of interim federal prosecutors. Last week, the White House fired Donald Kinsella hours after he was sworn in as U.S. attorney in the Northern District of New York.
“Judges don’t pick U.S. Attorneys, @POTUS does. See Article II of our Constitution. You are fired, Donald Kinsella,” Blanche wrote on X at the time.
In July, Attorney General Pam Bondi fired Desiree Leigh Grace as U.S. attorney for New Jersey the same day she was appointed by federal judges. Grace was tapped to replace Alina Habba, who, like Halligan, is a personal ally of Trump.
Clarissa-Jan Lim is a breaking news reporter for MS NOW. She was previously a senior reporter and editor at BuzzFeed News.
- Democrats warn Trump ‘must consult with Congress’ before striking Iran
- Trump hikes global tariff even higher — to 15% after Supreme Court ruling
- DOJ again swiftly fires a U.S. attorney chosen to replace Trump loyalist
- Trump’s ‘Board of Peace’ is a grim joke
- Texas Republicans have a new campaign strategy — and a surprisingly retro boogeyman
- Trump administration relaxes limits on pollutants that coal plants may emit
- Trump Administration Restores Philadelphia Slavery Exhibition After Court Order
- Trump’s made tariffs central to his presidency. What’s next?
- Trump has other tariff options after Supreme Court strikes down his worldwide import taxes
- Saudi Arabia may enrich uranium under proposed US deal
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoLuigi Mangione acknowledges public support in first official statement since arrest
-
Politics1 year agoFormer ‘Squad’ members launching ‘Bowman and Bush’ YouTube show
-
The Dictatorship5 months agoMike Johnson sums up the GOP’s arrogant position on military occupation with two words
-
Politics1 year agoBlue Light News’s Editorial Director Ryan Hutchins speaks at Blue Light News’s 2025 Governors Summit
-
Politics1 year agoFormer Kentucky AG Daniel Cameron launches Senate bid
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoPete Hegseth’s tenure at the Pentagon goes from bad to worse
-
Uncategorized1 year ago
Bob Good to step down as Freedom Caucus chair this week
-
Politics10 months agoDemocrat challenging Joni Ernst: I want to ‘tear down’ party, ‘build it back up’