Trump is legally spent in the Chinese tariff step, the rules of the judge in the court winning for the White House

A federal judge rejected an emergency lawsuit this week aimed at stopping the president Donald Trump A sweeping tariff from the forces, and the case fell to the American International Trade Court for further review.

The American boycott judge rejected. Kent Waydal II is a proposal for the emergency company in Florida to stay their challenge on Trump’s tariff, and he agreed that the case should be heard by the American International Trade Court, noting that “it does not make sense for this case to remain in this court because Cit is already thinking about almost many identical benefits.”

It also appears to be confirming that Trump has power under the Law of Economic Forces in International Emergency Cases, or IEPA, to impose comprehensive definitions for reasons other than increasing revenues.

The decision is the first time Federal judge It seems that he stood with Trump’s claim that the 1970s Law gives him coverage to impose a unilateral tariff for reasons other than increasing revenues. It is also a victory for the Trump administration, which has sought to transfer its cases to the New York -based court.

Aspects of the American Court of International Trade with Trump in the Customs tariff case

This comes as prosecutors in a series of lawsuits filed throughout the country, which used Trump inappropriately used the IEEPA Economic Forces Law (IEPA) as a basis for the implementation of comprehensive new import fees.

But it seems that Wiref feels differently. He said Trump has the ability to enact definitions, a question he said was “actually answered 50 years ago” by a precedent in the United States against Yoshida International Inc. It is an issue filed by a Japanese cloud company under the management of Nixon.

Judge Wirel said that Trump’s logical basis for definitions, which includes regulating drug flow to the United States, and to solve the so -called “trade deficit” with China, is sufficient to meet the conditions of calling IEPA.

Likewise, the declared purpose Definitions In this case, the judge said that in this case it is to help stop the flow of illegal drugs to the United States and treat continuous commercial imbalances, not to increase revenues.

But the victory can be short -term.

It is not clear whether Trump will have an advantage in the International Trade Court, although this court was previously more sympathetic to the administration.

Federal judges in New York and Texas prevent Trump’s deportation after the rule of Scotos

The three judges committee rejected a request earlier this year by a group of small companies that sought to stop immediately Trump’s tariff Among the forces, the saying that the plaintiffs have failed to show the possibility that they will suffer from “immediate and repaired harm” as a result of economic sanctions.

But 50 years have passed since CIT, which was then known as the Customs Court and Patents, decided whether the president had a tariff.

There is also a “difference between what was happening in the early seventies of the twentieth century, the heating of one small Japanese clouds, and a management that wants to use these standards that Congress set somewhat mysterious” when it constitutes a national emergency, David H. Feldman, an economist and professor in William and Mary, Fox News told an interview.

Feldman said: “If the courts in the end are completely emerged, and it says that these laws mean everything the president believes that they mean, we have descended into a world,” where the supreme leader can make these decisions on a whim, or as they see them suitable for individual companies. This means that there will be no “examination of the presidential power to process the markets.”

Wetherll appears to think that.

Click here to get the Fox News app

“The reason for Yoshida is convincing, and the court does not see any reason for not being applied to IEPA because the logical language of IEPA is identical to the logical language in TWEA,” he said.

This ruling comes amid a set of lawsuits that sought to prevent or stop Trump’s actions in the short term, including lawsuits aimed at reducing Doug, or the “Illon” agency led by musk, and prevents Trump’s ban on childbirth and difficult definitions, among many other things.