Appeals Court rules Trump's Reciprocal & Trafficking tariffs illegal; they remain in place for now
Summary: La discusión gira en torno a una decisión de un tribunal de apelaciones que declaró ilegales los aranceles de Reciprocidad y Tráfico impuestos por las órdenes ejecutivas del presidente, afirmando que la Ley de Poderes Económicos Internacionales de Emergencia no autoriza tal acción. Los aranceles permanecerán vigentes hasta octubre, permitiendo tiempo para que se presente una apelación ante la Corte Suprema. Algunos participantes, como fergua3 y mrdutch1001, expresan escepticismo sobre la aplicación de esta sentencia, señalando el historial del presidente de desafiar fallos judiciales y su estilo autoritario. Otros, como byto253, esperan que el caso llegue pronto a la Corte Suprema, mientras que john_koenig99 discute de manera irónica el respaldo del Congreso al presidente. El tema de los "tacos" se introduce humorísticamente en la conversación, destacando un tono de frustración y sarcasmo entre los participantes.
An appeal's court ruled today that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act does not authorize the president to impose the Reciprocal and Trafficking tariffs imposed by his executive orders, but they will remain in place until at least October to give time for an appeal to be filed with the Supreme Court.
From CNN:
The court ruled that Congress, in passing the IEEPA, did not give the president “wide-ranging authority to impose tariffs of the nature of the Trafficking and Reciprocal Tariffs.”
“Notably, when drafting IEEPA, Congress did not use the term ‘tariff’ or any of its synonyms, like ‘duty’ or ‘tax,’” the court said in its majority ruling. “The absence of any such tariff language in IEEPA contrasts with statutes where Congress has affirmatively granted such power and included clear limits on that power.”
The majority concluded that Trump’s effort to roll out sweeping tariffs like the ones at issue in the case are of such great “magnitude” that he must have explicit congressional authorization if he wants to impose them lawfully.
“We discern no clear congressional authorization by IEEPA for tariffs of the magnitude of the Reciprocal Tariffs and Trafficking Tariffs,” they wrote.
john_koenig99
·11 months agoMy hopes of anything changes for the better are quite slim. Considering that the US Congress is pro taco.
fergua3
·11 months agofyi: 'taco' means 'trump always chickens out'. So congress is most definitely not pro taco, they are pro their lord and god, Trump.
john_koenig99
·11 months agoI know that acronym, but the one I have in mind (everytime I use it, anyways) is one that I can't publish here without being censored.
easoss
·11 months agoQuit the Taco talk, I'm hungry and now I want one.
byto253
·11 months agoJust hope it makes it to the Supreme Court sooner than later. <insert popcorn eating emoji)
mrdutch1001
·11 months agoOn the surface this "may" be considered good news but really is it?This is just one of many ongoing court battles against the Trump Administration...
The law means nothing to DT, he has no respect for the law,believes he is above the law and that laws don't apply to him, and as long as he is that authoritarian dictator ruling the USA, he will continue to break laws,defy laws,ignore laws...
clemowbooks
·11 months agoIt depends on who the customs and postal workers and management decide to follow.
If they decide to obey the law, the tariffs disappear.
If they in their hundreds of thousands, with a unionized work force, decide to obey one man and ignore the other two branches of government, the tariffs remain and the USA gets kicked out of the UPU.
All international shipping then moves only by private shippers as was the case before 1874 and the founding of the Universal Postal Union.
easoss
·11 months agoTrump speaks fondly of America's gilded age of the late 19th century as being the greatest era of wealth in the countries history. Problem is, 5 men basically controlled all of it. He admires that and wants it to return.
fergua3
·11 months agoSupreme Court will probably side with Trump like they usually do, and if they don't, no problem, he's ignored their rulings before. There is no mechanism of enforcement.