Judges on the U.S. Federal Court of Appeals in Washington expressed serious skepticism about the legal basis on which Donald Trump's administration imposed massive tariffs without prior approval from Congress, the Associated Press reported, BTA reported.
During a hearing today, the judges questioned the interpretation of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) of 1977, used by Trump as an argument for his unilateral decision.
"This law does not even mention the word "tariffs", said Judge Jimmy Reyna, expressing doubt about the government's position. Administration lawyer Brett Shumate acknowledged that no president has ever interpreted the law in this way, but insisted that Trump's actions were legal. The law allows for asset freezes and transaction blocking in emergency circumstances, but has not been used to impose trade tariffs.
Chief Justice Kimberly Moore gave the example of a hypothetical 20 percent tariff on coffee imposed under the pretext of a military threat, stressing that it would not be proportionate. Plaintiffs' lawyer Neil Katyal called Trump's actions "breathtaking" and compared the argument to the president's right to act without restraint under the guise of a national emergency.
The case, which challenges the so-called "Emancipation Day tariffs" (April 2), does not affect tariffs on steel, aluminum, automobiles or those imposed on China. It is one of at least seven cases alleging that Trump overstepped his authority by imposing tariffs in violation of the Constitution, which gives Congress the exclusive power to tax and set trade policies.
According to data, during Trump's term, the average U.S. tariff rate has exceeded 18 percent, the highest level since 1934.
The case will be heard by a full bench of the court, which includes all sitting justices - eight appointed by Democratic presidents and three appointed by Republican presidents. There is no set deadline for a ruling on the case, but the losing party is expected to file an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court soon.