Identify the definitions of the court ruling

president Donald Trump The aggressive trade agenda collided with a large obstacle this week when a federal appeal court ruled that most “mutual definitions” are illegal.

the The American Court of Appeal for the Federal Department detained Friday Trump exceeded his presidential authority when he imposed drawings on almost every country in the world as part of the “Liberation Day” declaration on April 2.

Before the court procedures, Trump’s tariff was appointed to nearly 69 % of US goods imports, According to the Tax Corporation. If neglected, duties will affect approximately 16 %.

The referee pumps a heavy dose of uncertainty in a central principle of Trump’s economic agenda, which has rocked the global economy since April.

At the present time, the decision of the Court of Appeal states that the duties on the goods from most countries – which reach 50 % for a few countries – will remain in effect even October 14To allow the Trump administration time to appeal the US Supreme Court’s decision.

Trump was martyred 1977 The Economic Forces Law for International Emergency To justify the sweeping tariffs. It declared the United States trade deficit With other countries, a national emergency, and I IEPA called for the imposition of acute fees.

However, the Court of Appeal ruled that IEPA is not granted by the authority to implement definitions, saying that power only lies with Congress.

The court said in the constitution, “The basic authority of Congress to impose taxes such as customs tariffs is exclusively in the legislative branch by the constitution,” the court said in the constitution. 7-4 Judgment.

The ruling puts Trump’s fees, which entered into force earlier this month after multiple delays, on a shaky land. Trump imposed definitions on more than 60 countries, including a 50 % rate on India and Brazil. It also imposed a 10 % base tariff on most other countries that did not reach a specific mutual tariff.

The court also considered Trump’s tariff for China, Canada and Mexico – which the administration claimed was necessary because the countries were not doing enough to reduce the alleged trafficking in the United States – was illegal.

Trump said he would appeal the Supreme Court ruling. “If he is allowed to stand, this decision will literally destroy the United States of America,” it is books On social media.

If the Supreme Court ultimately decides that the definitions are illegal, there are still other ways of Trump to implement the fees, but the range is likely to be more restricted.

For example, Trump can call 1974 Trade Law, But this law carries definitions by 15 % and only for 150 days, unless Congress expands.

Earlier this month, the Trump administration expanded 50 % Steel and aluminum tariff To include more than 400 additional products category, according to the Ministry of Commerce.

Trump relied on these definitions of the sector-as it is referred to as the customs tariff 232-to bypass the court’s procedures.

Article 232 A tariff is essential to President Trump’s introductory strategy, “Mike Lille, a partner in the law firm Red Smith, Previously said cnbc.

“They are not a target of suspended litigation, and it is likely to survive a legal challenge and continue in the upcoming presidential administration, which we saw with the aluminum and steel tariffs that are already imposed in the framework of the first Trump administration.”

The Trump administration is said to plan to expand its definitions in the sector, including those in steel and aluminum, as a way to rid the legal battles looming on the horizon, according to Wall Street Journal.

The definitions that Trump imposed on China during his first term, which former president Joe Biden It is preserved, it is also possible that it will remain in spite of the Court of Appeal.

Finally, the exemption was “minimal” It was officially eliminated on FridayTherefore, imports are subject to $ 800 or less now to tariffs and duties, another blow to small and medium -sized American companies, and part of the Trump commercial agenda that appears in the court.