The U.S. Federal Court strikes down a key part of its tariff policy as unconstitutional.

The three-judge panel of the Court of International Trade ruled in a manner overwhelming that Trump's executive orders “exceed any authority granted” by the aforementioned law. In their ruling, the judges emphasized that Congress does not delegate authority “unlimited” the president to regulate imports by imposing tariffs.

 

As a direct consequence of this ruling, the suspension and permanent ban of the taxes implemented under the IEEPA. This includes tariffs of the 30% off products from China, 25% on certain goods from Mexico and Canada, and the overall rate of 10% applied to the European Union, among other measures. The court has granted a period of dice días so that the corresponding administrative orders make this precautionary measure effective.

 

It is important to highlight that this judicial decision does not affect all tariffs imposed by the Trump administration. Excluded are taxes from the 25% on automobiles, steel and aluminum, as these are subject to other trade laws. The ruling responds to two lawsuits filed by a conglomerate of companies and several states, who argued that Trump violated the Constitution by exceeding its powers regarding import tariffs.

 

Reactions and Defense of the White House

 

The White House was quick to react firmly, announcing that will appeal the sentence. The administration spokesman, Kush Desai, defended the presidential position by stating: “It is not up to unelected judges to decide how to address a national emergency. President Trump pledged to put America first, and this administration is determined to use every tool of the executive branch to address this crisis and restore American greatness.”.

 

 

For his part, the advisor Stephen Miller turned to the social network X to express their discontent, calling the decision a “judicial coup out of control”.

 

 

The president himself Trump He defended his tariff policy through his social networks, even assuring that he is undertaking a “divine mission” and sharing an image of yourself with the message “Nothing can stop what is to come”. The administration has consistently maintained that the trade deficits and entry of drugs such as fentanyl They justify the imposition of these tariffs as a protective measure for American communities.

 

Significant Impact on Future Tariff Policy

 

This court ruling not only represents one of the biggest setbacks for Trump in his second term, but also tests the limits of presidential power in international trade and will have a significant impact in the future tariff policy of the US government, both in legal and strategic terms.

 

Firstly, the ruling marks a crucial precedent by establishing that the president cannot unilaterally impose global and reciprocal tariffs under the IEEPA, unless there is an express and limited delegation from Congress. This reinforces the primacy of the legislature in the imposition of general tariffs.

 

At the strategic level, the US government must now seek other legal avenues or negotiate directly with Congress to implement broad-based tariff policies. This could foster a greater cooperation between the powers of the State or, on the contrary, intensify political pressure for Congress to delegate specific powers to the executive.

 

From an economic perspective, the judicial blockage reduces short-term uncertainty for importers and exporters, who had faced rising costs and restructuring of their supply chains. However, the Uncertainty about the overall direction of US trade policy persists, as the government could try to reimpose tariffs under other legal frameworks. Although the The threat of tariff escalation and retaliation by other countries has temporarily diminished, but remains latent..

 

Implications for Negotiations with the European Union

 

The federal court's decision has a direct and relevant impact on trade negotiations between the United States and the European Union, currently delayed until next July 9th.

 

The judicial blockage limits the Trump administration's ability to impose global or unilateral tariffs against the EU without a solid legal basis, which reduces coercive pressure that Washington could exert on Brussels. Although the extension of the talks was agreed upon before the ruling, the sentence strengthens the European negotiating position, eliminating the looming threat of massive unilaterally imposed taxes.

 

The judgment also introduces greater legal security and stability for both sides. The EU can negotiate with the certainty that the The threat of 20% or even 50% tariffs on European products cannot be implemented arbitrarily. while the sentence is in force.

 

Finally, this judicial reversal could accelerate the pace of negotiations, as Washington will be forced to seek legal or political alternatives to sustain its position. The EU, for its part, has expressed its willingness to move forward. “quickly and decisively” in the talks, although he insists on the need for time until the July 9th to achieve a mutually beneficial agreement.