(05-28-2025 07:08 PM)GeminiCoog Wrote:  So a made-up "court" made this "ruling" then. Okay.

Trump's tariffs are still in place anyway. Moving on.

Court of International Trade has original and exclusive jurisdiction over civil actions arising out of U.S. customs and international trade laws. It is a full Art 3 court, and the only lower Federal court having jurisdiction to hear this case.

Trump's tariffs were struck down en toto by the summary judgement.

(05-28-2025 06:33 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  https://www.axios.com/2025/05/28/trump-t...urt-ruling

Court ruled Trump doesn't have the authority to set tariffs

A federal court on Wednesday ruled President Trump does not have the authority under economic emergency legislation to impose sweeping global tariffs.

Why it matters: The U.S. Court of International Trade's ruling could bring the administration's trade war to a screeching halt.

Driving the news: The court, ruling in two separate cases, issued a summary judgment throwing out all the tariffs Trump imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA.

Trump used the 1977 law, which had never before been invoked in a tariff situation, to unilaterally impose sweeping trade levies worldwide.
The two groups of plaintiffs — businesses and states — sued on the grounds that the president's orders violated the Constitution's grant of authority over import duties to Congress.
What they're saying: "The question in the two cases before the court is whether the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977 ("IEEPA") delegates these powers to the President in the form of authority to impose unlimited tariffs on goods from nearly every country in the world," the three-judge panel wrote.

"The court does not read IEEPA to confer such unbounded authority and sets aside the challenged tariffs imposed thereunder."

Judges get stupider by the day especially progressive activist judges.

Supreme Court needs to reel in these rogue judges

Tariffs is out of their jurisdiction

Judges have no business in foreign policy especially lower courts that have no jurisdiction nationwide

(05-28-2025 10:59 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(05-28-2025 07:08 PM)GeminiCoog Wrote:  So a made-up "court" made this "ruling" then. Okay.

Trump's tariffs are still in place anyway. Moving on.

Court of International Trade has original and exclusive jurisdiction over civil actions arising out of U.S. customs and international trade laws. It is a full Art 3 court, and the only lower Federal court having jurisdiction to hear this case.

Trump's tariffs were struck down en toto by the summary judgement.

Summary judgement in this case = the DOJ not even worrying about it because they will focus on the appeal.

Folks celebrating the court decision hobbling efforts for fairer trade terms should consider Trump still has significant latitude to set tariffs based on other authority. I read the rates can be up to 50%.

(05-28-2025 10:59 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(05-28-2025 07:08 PM)GeminiCoog Wrote:  So a made-up "court" made this "ruling" then. Okay.

Trump's tariffs are still in place anyway. Moving on.

Court of International Trade has original and exclusive jurisdiction over civil actions arising out of U.S. customs and international trade laws. It is a full Art 3 court, and the only lower Federal court having jurisdiction to hear this case.

Trump's tariffs were struck down en toto by the summary judgement.

Your TDS is showing. Riddle me this. Many presidents have used tariffs to some extent, including Biden, who kept some tariffs on China.

Why were those okay, but not Trump's all of a sudden?

Poor Mensa... He keeps ruining undies and britches over nothing.

well then, I say we have a class-action lawsuit and sue the government for a refund for all the tariffs Obama, Clinton and *Biden imposed as well. We now have a judge who believes he can set foreign policy, we can use him!

(05-29-2025 05:25 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(05-28-2025 10:59 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(05-28-2025 07:08 PM)GeminiCoog Wrote:  So a made-up "court" made this "ruling" then. Okay.

Trump's tariffs are still in place anyway. Moving on.

Court of International Trade has original and exclusive jurisdiction over civil actions arising out of U.S. customs and international trade laws. It is a full Art 3 court, and the only lower Federal court having jurisdiction to hear this case.

Trump's tariffs were struck down en toto by the summary judgement.

Your TDS is showing. Riddle me this. Many presidents have used tariffs to some extent, including Biden, who kept some tariffs on China.

Why were those okay, but not Trump's all of a sudden?

It's much like the immigration debacle. The Trump administration has some authority to carry out these policies, but like trying to use the AEA in a novel way it has tried to do tariffs quick and easy by declaring an "emergency" rather than going the slower and more methodical route other presidents have used to impose tariffs. Once again the courts have held the line on Trump grabbing vast powers to disrupt the status quo simply by claiming "emergency" and doing whatever he feels like, today.

(05-29-2025 07:10 AM)Gamenole Wrote:  

(05-29-2025 05:25 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(05-28-2025 10:59 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(05-28-2025 07:08 PM)GeminiCoog Wrote:  So a made-up "court" made this "ruling" then. Okay.

Trump's tariffs are still in place anyway. Moving on.

Court of International Trade has original and exclusive jurisdiction over civil actions arising out of U.S. customs and international trade laws. It is a full Art 3 court, and the only lower Federal court having jurisdiction to hear this case.

Trump's tariffs were struck down en toto by the summary judgement.

Your TDS is showing. Riddle me this. Many presidents have used tariffs to some extent, including Biden, who kept some tariffs on China.

Why were those okay, but not Trump's all of a sudden?

It's much like the immigration debacle. The Trump administration has some authority to carry out these policies, but like trying to use the AEA in a novel way it has tried to do tariffs quick and easy by declaring an "emergency" rather than going the slower and more methodical route other presidents have used to impose tariffs. Once again the courts have held the line on Trump grabbing vast powers to disrupt the status quo simply by claiming "emergency" and doing whatever he feels like, today.

You have a source for all that?

It's going to get hammered.

They had the appeal drafted and filed about 5 minutes after the decision was released.

Courts are not serious people any more. The real constitutional crisis liberals want will happen when the executive branch just flips them the bird

(05-29-2025 07:12 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(05-29-2025 07:10 AM)Gamenole Wrote:  It's much like the immigration debacle. The Trump administration has some authority to carry out these policies, but like trying to use the AEA in a novel way it has tried to do tariffs quick and easy by declaring an "emergency" rather than going the slower and more methodical route other presidents have used to impose tariffs. Once again the courts have held the line on Trump grabbing vast powers to disrupt the status quo simply by claiming "emergency" and doing whatever he feels like, today.

You have a source for all that?

You know he doesn't. Typical libtard just makes chit up.

(05-29-2025 05:25 AM)TripleA Wrote:  Many presidents have used tariffs to some extent, including Biden, who kept some tariffs on China.

Why were those okay, but not Trump's all of a sudden?

I've explained this like a dozen times now. I just can't make you understand it.

You're mostly talking about TARGETED tariffs. That's what prior presidents have done, including Biden. And most agree these can be effective and warranted.

What trump is doing is basically unprecedented...and stupid...like him.

Obviously Tom is just seeking attention. Even negative attention is attention.

(05-29-2025 07:35 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-29-2025 05:25 AM)TripleA Wrote:  Many presidents have used tariffs to some extent, including Biden, who kept some tariffs on China.

Why were those okay, but not Trump's all of a sudden?

I've explained this like a dozen times now. I just can't make you understand it.

You're mostly talking about TARGETED tariffs. That's what prior presidents have done, including Biden. And most agree these can be effective and warranted.

What trump is doing is basically unprecedented...and stupid...like him.

The number of times you say anything doesn't make it correct.

Show me the law where targeted tariffs are okay, but wider tariffs are not.

You know the difference between targeted and sweeping tariffs? Just the number of them, doofus. Everything else is the same.

And unprecedented doesn't make it illegal.

The real debate is likely whether he can declare an emergency to juice them up. But again, that is unsettled and thus still a courts issue.

(05-29-2025 08:06 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(05-29-2025 07:35 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-29-2025 05:25 AM)TripleA Wrote:  Many presidents have used tariffs to some extent, including Biden, who kept some tariffs on China.

Why were those okay, but not Trump's all of a sudden?

I've explained this like a dozen times now. I just can't make you understand it.

You're mostly talking about TARGETED tariffs. That's what prior presidents have done, including Biden. And most agree these can be effective and warranted.

What trump is doing is basically unprecedented...and stupid...like him.

The number of times you say anything doesn't make it correct.

Show me the law where targeted tariffs are okay, but wider tariffs are not.

You know the difference between targeted and sweeping tariffs? Just the number of them, doofus. Everything else is the same.

And unprecedented doesn't make it illegal.

The real debate is likely whether he can declare an emergency to juice them up. But again, that is unsettled and thus still a courts issue.

Nowhere did I speak to the law or illegality. I was only speaking about what prior presidents have done, including trump and Biden. They applied mostly sensible and targeted tariffs for certain situations on certain countries.

Not some grand basically blanket tariff on the whole globe like the idiot trump did...the thing that doesn't work and makes TACO's.

(05-29-2025 08:24 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-29-2025 08:06 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(05-29-2025 07:35 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-29-2025 05:25 AM)TripleA Wrote:  Many presidents have used tariffs to some extent, including Biden, who kept some tariffs on China.

Why were those okay, but not Trump's all of a sudden?

I've explained this like a dozen times now. I just can't make you understand it.

You're mostly talking about TARGETED tariffs. That's what prior presidents have done, including Biden. And most agree these can be effective and warranted.

What trump is doing is basically unprecedented...and stupid...like him.

The number of times you say anything doesn't make it correct.

Show me the law where targeted tariffs are okay, but wider tariffs are not.

You know the difference between targeted and sweeping tariffs? Just the number of them, doofus. Everything else is the same.

And unprecedented doesn't make it illegal.

The real debate is likely whether he can declare an emergency to juice them up. But again, that is unsettled and thus still a courts issue.

Nowhere did I speak to the law or illegality. I was only speaking about what prior presidents have done, including trump and Biden. They applied mostly sensible and targeted tariffs for certain situations on certain countries.

Not some grand basically blanket tariff on the whole globe like the idiot trump did...the thing that doesn't work and makes TACO's.

f
How can the judge block Trump's tariffs. It was you who said Trump already chickened out of them. Are you admitting that was a lie now?

(05-29-2025 08:24 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-29-2025 08:06 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(05-29-2025 07:35 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-29-2025 05:25 AM)TripleA Wrote:  Many presidents have used tariffs to some extent, including Biden, who kept some tariffs on China.

Why were those okay, but not Trump's all of a sudden?

I've explained this like a dozen times now. I just can't make you understand it.

You're mostly talking about TARGETED tariffs. That's what prior presidents have done, including Biden. And most agree these can be effective and warranted.

What trump is doing is basically unprecedented...and stupid...like him.

The number of times you say anything doesn't make it correct.

Show me the law where targeted tariffs are okay, but wider tariffs are not.

You know the difference between targeted and sweeping tariffs? Just the number of them, doofus. Everything else is the same.

And unprecedented doesn't make it illegal.

The real debate is likely whether he can declare an emergency to juice them up. But again, that is unsettled and thus still a courts issue.

Nowhere did I speak to the law or illegality. I was only speaking about what prior presidents have done, including trump and Biden. They applied mostly sensible and targeted tariffs for certain situations on certain countries.

Not some grand basically blanket tariff on the whole globe like the idiot trump did...the thing that doesn't work and makes TACO's.

Which means it's just more typical BS on your part.

3A: you're just giving him what he wants: ATTENTION

(05-29-2025 05:25 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(05-28-2025 10:59 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(05-28-2025 07:08 PM)GeminiCoog Wrote:  So a made-up "court" made this "ruling" then. Okay.

Trump's tariffs are still in place anyway. Moving on.

Court of International Trade has original and exclusive jurisdiction over civil actions arising out of U.S. customs and international trade laws. It is a full Art 3 court, and the only lower Federal court having jurisdiction to hear this case.

Trump's tariffs were struck down en toto by the summary judgement.

Your TDS is showing.

A fact of jurisdiction, and a fact that there was a summary judgement is 'TDS'. Cool **** there chuckles. Care to kneejerk some more?

If you think those false or an expression of 'TDS' Id try strapping on a research hat and simply do a back check. You are more than welcome to do that.

Quote:Riddle me this. Many presidents have used tariffs to some extent, including Biden, who kept some tariffs on China.

Quote:Why were those okay, but not Trump's all of a sudden?

https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-conten...legal.pdf.

You hate anything more than a crayola coloring book cartoon book reason, so I will point you to the ruling itself.

Right up front -- scope, and depth. And the reasons Trump gave to use unlimited scope, amount, and depth under the emergency section are already covered in a far more limited grant by Congress. Those more limited grants being the path Biden and others have taken -- and typically followed by Congressional approval when they 'run the course'.

Yep nothing in the law, just TDS Im sure. The safe harbor of 'anything that fails Trumpland', just say "TDS" real loud.