US President Donald Trump criticized a court ruling on Thursday suspending the "reciprocal" tariffs imposed since early April on all goods exported to the United States, while Beijing urged the White House to "completely rescind" them.
While the three judges at the US Court of International Trade did not object in their ruling to Washington's ability to increase additional tariffs on imports, they deemed that this was within the authority of Congress and that Trump had exceeded his authority.
The suspension includes tariffs imposed on Canada, Mexico, and China, which are accused of not taking sufficient action to combat fentanyl smuggling, as well as the 10% additional tariff imposed on April 2 on goods entering the United States, which can reach 50% depending on the country of origin.
For its part, the White House said in a comment posted on its "Rapid Response 47" account on the X platform that the ruling was "clearly wrong," adding, "We are confident that this decision will be overturned on appeal."
Earlier, a White House spokesman denounced the ruling by "unelected judges" who lacked "the authority to decide the proper management of a national emergency."
"President Trump pledged to put America first, and the administration has decided to use the full powers of the executive branch to respond to this crisis and restore American greatness," spokesman Kash Desai added.
The Trump administration immediately filed an appeal against the ruling, which gave the White House a 10-day deadline to complete executive actions to halt the tariffs.
The ruling comes as Trump uses tariffs as leverage in his trade negotiations with allies and adversaries, including the European Union and China.
Beijing, which had imposed 145% tariffs on China before sharply reducing them to allow for negotiations, responded to the US court ruling by calling on Washington to lift the tariffs.
"China urges the United States to heed the voices of reason from the international community and various national parties and completely lift the unjustified unilateral tariffs," Chinese Commerce Ministry spokeswoman He Yongxian said at a press conference. For his part, Japan's envoy to the tariff negotiations, Ryusei Akazawa, said as he departed for Washington for a fourth round of negotiations that Tokyo, which is suffering from the auto tariffs, would study the court's decision.
Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney told his country's parliament, "The government welcomes yesterday's decision, which confirms Canada's position that these tariffs are unlawful and unjustified."
However, Carney added, "We believe that our trade relationship with the United States remains seriously threatened" by the tariffs that remain in effect on steel, aluminum, and autos, expressing his hope to "strengthen our cooperation with trusted trading partners and allies around the world."
In the ruling, seen by AFP on Wednesday, the judges ruled that the president cannot invoke the Emergency Economic Response Act of 1977, which he used to issue presidential decrees, "to impose unlimited additional tariffs on products imported from virtually every country."
The judges added that the executive orders issued by Trump since returning to the White House "exceed the powers granted to the president under the law," which can be used in economic emergencies "to control imports through the use of tariffs."
The court noted that this law "authorizes the president to impose the necessary economic sanctions when an economic emergency arises to address an 'unusual and unusual' threat."
The judges emphasized that any interpretation of the law that grants the president "unrestricted authority over tariffs is unconstitutional."
However, White House Trade Advisor Peter Navarro said in this regard, "There is no doubt that this is an economic emergency. We believe we have a strong case."
In a statement, Democratic Minority Leader Gregory Meeks of the House Foreign Affairs Committee said that the decision confirms "that tariffs constitute an unlawful abuse of executive power."
The court's decision followed two complaints filed in recent weeks: one by a coalition of 12 US states, notably Arizona, Oregon, New York, and Minnesota, and the other by a group of US companies.
The two complaints specifically accused Donald Trump of using a law that prevents him from resorting to emergency measures to impose tariffs, a power granted by the Constitution to Congress. The court relied on this argument in its decision.
Since returning to the White House, Trump has used tariffs as a key weapon in his trade policy, as well as to stimulate domestic industry and pressure other countries.
Analysts at London-based Capital Economics said the case could go to the Supreme Court.
They added, "However, this is unlikely to mark the end of the tariff war, given the Trump administration's other options for imposing tariffs," noting that the US president may seek to use other provisions of US law or obtain congressional approval for the tariffs.
.jpg)
0 Comments