A reminder that this case boils down to the interpretation of a 1977 federal law — the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA.
The U.S. Constitution grants Congress the power to levy tariffs. But Trump had argued that by invoking the IEEPA, he alone has the authority to do so. No president has previously ever used the act to impose tariffs.
The IEEPA does give the president broad powers in the case of a “national emergency” and an “unusual and extraordinary threat” — powers that include the ability to “regulate” imports.
And Trump had argued that U.S trade deficits with other countries and the trafficking of fentanyl into the U.S. — by countries including Canada and Mexico — constitute national emergencies.
The plaintiffs argued, among other issues, that the IEEPA makes no mention of tariffs or taxes as specific tools to “regulate” imports.The court’s opinion today reads: “Based on two words separated by 16 others in Section 1702(a)(1)(B) of IEEPA — ‘regulate’ and ‘importation’ — the President asserts the independent power to impose tariffs on imports from any country, of any product, at any rate, for any amount of time. Those words cannot bear such weight.”
