US President Donald Trump has been subjected to a series of courtroom losses in recent days, as he and his administration continue to test the legal limits of the presidential authorities.
Despite the suffering of six legal setbacks in less than a week, the administration is progressing in its agenda, largely because none of these provisions does not constitute the final judicial word on this topic.
In the case with the largest effects of Canada, the American Court of Appeal for the Federal Department Ruling Trump’s imposition of wide tariffs or commercial partners-tariffs. The administration was justifying a reaction to Economic and drug emergency situations.
This ruling came on August 29, last Friday. Since then, in a quick caliphate, five other decisions were noticeable against the Trump administration:
The White House has The petition is already The US Supreme Court to consider the ruling of definitions, and at the same time the definitions remain in place.
The court, which stops the deportation of children to Guatemala, is temporary, while the legal battle is expected to go in the coming days.
The Trump administration can appeal all other provisions – and will definitely do so, according to legal experts.
Although the American judge announced that it is illegal to send the National Guard to Los Angeles in June, President Donald Trump said his “commitment” was to send forces to Chicago to combat crime.
Peter Larsen, a professor at the Faculty of Law at Mitchell Hamer in St. Paul, Minnesota, says he believes that the Trump administration has been spent on the Supreme Court to a large extent in its favor in any cases that make it far.
He told CBC News: “It seems that the executive authority, the Trump administration, says:” We will continue to move forward. Even if these lower courts have disagreed with us, we are completely confident that the United States Supreme Court will support our authority to do these things. ”
Larsen is believed that the Supreme Court, led by Judge John J. Roberts will put some restrictions on the executive authority, but he believes that the Trump administration has a good reason to optimistic about its chances of winning the final stage of these legal battles.
“The Roberts Court has a great appetite for a long -term inconvenience,” he said. “Certainly we have seen the Roberts court also explaining the president’s powers much more than other courts in the past.”
The Trump administration officials spent the weekend in a return against the US Court of Appeal ruling that most of the customs duties against Canada were illegal. Economic Counselor Peter Navarro described the decision as political motives.
The issue of definitions can be an exception.
Treats Trump definitions Imposed on imports from Canada and Mexico In March and what the President called “Tahrir Day”, it was imposed first On dozens of countries In April, it stopped temporarily, then it was re -applied in August. Trump is the first president to try to use economic power law in international emergency situations to impose definitions.
Scott R. Anderson, a older colleague in the National Security Law program at Colombia’s Law College, is not sure that the Supreme Court will accept the Trump administration’s argument.
Anderson told Anderson newspaper Daily Podcast Lorf this week. “There are many competing interests, and competing legal trends that intersect here, and it is not very easy for me to see how they are dismantled.”
Supreme Court instructions
In the case of external relief, even the judge himself acknowledged that the legal battle has not ended.
Local court judge, Amir Ali, wrote wisdom The “final Supreme Court directives” will be needed in the event that “raises” questions of enormous legal and practical importance ” – mainly whether the president can prevent a federal agency from spending the money that Congress has already allocated.
What remains is to see whether the administration turns its tactics in response to any of these cases.
the A command in California Announcing the use of the army in the Los Angeles police is illegal, does not apply to the deployment of the National Guard of the Administration in Washington to deal with what it claims to be an increase in crime.
Trump is still threatening to send the National Guard to Chicago in response to the crime, although he did not take a step to do this by Friday.
Meanwhile, the White House retracts the legitimacy of some rulings, while stopping it actually challenging them.
In response to the deportation issue, which included Guatemalene children, Deputy Chief of Staff of Trump Stephen Miller Posted on X The “democratic judge” was “refused to allow them to gather with their parents.”
In a statement In the Harvard University case, the assistant press secretary at the White House Liz Huston cleaned the ruling that he comes from a “activist judge appointed by Obama” and said that the university “is still not eligible to obtain scholarships in the future.”
None of this seems to be a management of its agenda.
https://i.cbc.ca/1.7626777.1757108673!/cpImage/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/16x9_1180/trump.jpg?im=Resize%3D620
Source link