Trump's big plans on trade and more run up against laws of political
gravity, separation of powers
[May 30, 2025]
By JOSH BOAK
WASHINGTON (AP) — Once again, President Donald Trump’s biggest policy
plans were stopped in their tracks.
On Wednesday, an obscure but powerful court in New York rejected the
legal foundation of Trump’s most sweeping tariffs, finding that Trump
could not use a 1977 law to declare a national emergency on trade
imbalances and fentanyl smuggling to justify a series of import taxes
that have unsettled the world. Reordering the global economy by
executive fiat was an unconstitutional end-run around Congress’ powers,
the three-judge panel of Trump, Obama and Reagan appointees ruled in a
scathing rebuke of Trump’s action.
The setbacks fit a broader pattern for a president who has advanced an
extraordinarily expansive view of executive power. Federal courts have
called out the lack of due process in some of Trump's deportation
efforts. His proposed income tax cuts, now working their way through
Congress, are so costly that some of them can't be made permanent, as
Trump had wished. His efforts to humble Harvard University and cut the
federal workforce have encountered legal obstacles. And he's running up
against reality as his pledges to quickly end the wars in Ukraine and
Gaza have turned into slogs.
The laws of political gravity, the separation of powers and geopolitical
realities are proving to be tougher to conquer than Trump will publicly
admit. As various legal skirmishes play out, he may have to choose
between bowing to the limits of his power or trying to ignore the
judicial system.
“If the latter, we may have a constitutional crisis,” said University of
Texas history professor H.W. Brands.
Trump blasted the ruling by the U.S. Court of International Trade,
writing Thursday on his Truth Social platform, “If allowed to stand,
this would completely destroy Presidential Power — The Presidency would
never be the same!”
A second federal court on Thursday found Trump's tariffs to be improper.
Then a federal appeals court said the government can continue to collect
the tariffs under the emergency powers law for now as the Trump
administration challenges the ruling, though the government could be
obligated to refund the money if the ruling is upheld.
Kevin Hassett, director of the White House National Economic Council,
said there are two baseball caps in the room behind the Oval Office that
say “Trump Always Wins” and Trump has been “right" about everything.
“Trump does always win these negotiations because we’re right,” Hassett
said on Fox Business Network's “Mornings with Maria.” “These activist
judges are trying to slow down something right in the middle of really
important negotiations.”
Part of Trump's challenge lies in the nature of the job, in which only
the thorniest of problems cross his desk. But there’s also the fact that
Trump’s keen instincts for what plays well on TV don't necessarily help
with the nitty-gritty of policy details.
By unilaterally ordering tariffs, deportations and other actions through
the White House, Trump is bypassing both Congress and the broader
public, which could have given more popular legitimacy to his policy
choices, said Princeton University history professor Julian Zelizer.
“The president is trying to achieve his goals outside normal legal
processes and without focusing on public buy-in,” Zelizer said. “The
problem is that we do have a constitutional system and there are many
things a president can’t do. The courts are simply saying no. The
reality is that many of his boldest decisions stand on an incredibly
fragile foundation.”
[to top of second column]
|
President Donald Trump waves as he departs the White House, Friday,
May 23, 2025, in Washington. (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin)
As Trump sees it, his tariffs would solve genuine problems. His
“Liberation Day” taxes on imports would close persistent trade
imbalances with other countries, with his 10% baseline tariff
providing a stream of revenue to help offset the trillions of
dollars in federal borrowing that would be created by his planned
income tax cuts.
But when the financial markets panicked and the interest charged on
U.S. debt shot up, Trump backtracked and ratcheted down many of his
tariffs to 10% while negotiations began to take place.
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent suggested this had been the plan
all along to force new trade negotiations. But Trump shortly
undercut him by saying on the White House South Lawn that he backed
down because the financial markets were getting “yippy” — a reminder
that Trump's own improvisatory and disruptive style can upend any
working policy process.
Trump still has tariffs in place on autos, steel and aluminum. Those
are tied to the premise that imports would create national security
risks based on previous investigations under Section 232 of the
Trade Expansion Act of 1962. He could use other laws to start new
investigations or temporarily impose tariffs, but the White House is
more focused at the moment on challenging the court rulings.
“What is unprecedented is Trump asserting authority under a 1977
statute that had never been used for tariffs, not just for targeted
tariffs, but the largest tariffs since the 1930s," said Peter
Harrell, a fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
who served in the Biden White House. "That’s what is unprecedented
and unusual.“
Harrell said Trump could re-create many of his tariffs using other
laws but “it would require more work and be a much more orderly
process."
Rice University history professor Douglas Brinkley said Trump's
sense of the presidency relies on a deep misreading of the office.
He mistakenly assumes that the tariffs used in the 19th century to
fund a much smaller federal government would now be able to pay for
a much larger federal government. But he also assumes that power
flows to and from him, rather than from institutions and the rule of
law.
“He doesn’t seem to realize that anytime he doesn’t listen to the
court orders that he’s making an anti-American statement," Brinkley
said. "It’s telling people that I'm bigger than the American
Constitution, that judges are just errand boys for me.”
The Trump White House blamed its latest setback on the U.S. Court of
International Trade.
White House trade adviser Peter Navarro said in a Bloomberg News
interview that the judicial branch was part of the problem, keeping
Trump from delivering on his promises.
“We’ve got courts in this country who are basically engaged in
attacks on the American people,” Navarro said. “The president ran on
stopping the fentanyl poisoning, stopping international trade unfair
practices from stealing our factories and jobs. And courts keep
getting in the way of that.”
All contents © copyright 2025 Associated Press. All rights reserved |
