A New York court ruled on May 28, 2025, that US President Donald Trump exceeded his authority by imposing tariffs on imports from countries with trade surpluses with the US.

The court declared these tariffs illegal, explaining they were beyond the powers granted to the presidency.

This ruling has increased scrutiny on Peter Navarro, Trump’s trade adviser, who played a role in the tariff strategy.

Sources indicated that internal criticism of Navarro may lead to his replacement by Robert Lighthizer, Trump’s former trade secretary.

The tariffs were imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), a law typically used for sanctions or asset freezes against foreign adversaries.

🔗 Source: The Telegraph

🧠 Food for thought

1️⃣ Presidential tariff authority has been constitutionally contested throughout US history

The current legal battle over Trump’s tariffs continues a centuries-old tension between executive power and congressional authority over trade policy.

The Constitution explicitly grants Congress “the power to regulate commerce with foreign nations,” creating an inherent friction when presidents assert broad tariff authority 1.

This tension surfaced dramatically during the 1828 “Tariff of Abominations,” which sparked the Nullification Crisis when South Carolina attempted to nullify federal tariffs, highlighting early constitutional conflicts over trade authority 2.

Throughout the 19th century, presidents and Congress regularly clashed over tariff implementation, with tariff rates fluctuating dramatically based on which branch or political party held more influence 3.

The ruling against Trump’s use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) for imposing tariffs represents the latest chapter in this ongoing constitutional struggle, as the Court of International Trade explicitly stated that emergency powers cannot override Congress’s constitutional trade authority 4.

2️⃣ Emergency powers for tariffs marks significant departure from historical precedent

Trump’s use of IEEPA to implement broad tariffs represents a legal approach that diverges from how previous administrations deployed trade measures.

IEEPA has historically been used to impose sanctions on adversaries or freeze assets during emergencies, not as justification for wide-ranging tariffs on allies and trading partners 4.