The American Court of Appeal ruled that most of the customs duties issued by US President Donald Trump were illegal, as it has established a possible legal confrontation that could increase his agenda in foreign policy.
The ruling affects Trump’s “mutual” tariff, which is imposed on most countries around the world, as well as other definitions that slapped China, Mexico and Canada.
In Resolution 7-4, the American Court of Appeal of the Federal Department rejected the Trump argument that the customs tariff is permitted under the emergency economic powers law, describing them “unlike the law.”
The ruling will not be implemented until October 14 to give the administration time to demand the Supreme Court to take over the case.
Trump criticized the court and its ruling on the social truth, saying: “If he is allowed to stand, then this decision will literally destroy the United States of America.”
“Today, the Party Appeal Court said very incorrectly that our tariff should be removed, but they know that the United States of America will eventually win,” he wrote.
“If these definitions go at all, it will be a complete disaster for the country. It will make us weak financially, and we must be strong.”
He added that other countries imposed a tariff on the United States, and expected that the decision would be fluctuated by the Supreme Court.
Trump justified the customs tariff under the IEEPA Economic Forces Law (IEPA), which gives the president the authority to act against “unusual and unusual threats.
Trump declared a national emergency in trade, on the pretext that the lack of trade balance is harmful to American national security. However, the court ruled that the imposition of definitions is not within the president’s mandate, and that they are “an essential authority for Congress.”
In its ruling, the US Court of Appeal of the Federal Department rejected the Trump argument that the customs tariff is permitted according to its economic powers in emergency situations, and described the fees as “unlike the law.”
The 127 -page ruling says that IEPA “does not mention the customs tariff (or any of its synonyms) and does not have procedural protection that contains clear limits on the president’s authority to impose definitions.”
Consequently, the authority to impose taxes and definitions continues to belong to Congress, the court ruling, and IEPA has not exceeded this.
The court wrote that when Congress approved the law in 1977, it was aimed at “out of its previous practice and gave the unlimited president the authority to impose a tariff.”
The judges wrote: “When Congress intends to spoil the authority of the authority to impose a customs tariff, he does this explicitly, either using unambiguous terms such as tariff and duty, or through a general structure that shows that Congress indicates the customs tariff.”
This ruling comes in response to two supplies submitted by small companies and the United States coalition.
The lawsuits were filed after Trump’s executive orders in May, which imposed a 10 % tariff on each country in the world, as well as “mutual” definitions on dozens of countries. Trump announced the date of “Liberation Day” in America is an unfair commercial policies.
In addition to these definitions, the ruling also descends on the customs tariff for Canada, Mexico and China, which Trump says is necessary to stop the import of drugs and illegal immigrants.
On Friday, the ruling does not apply to the customs tariff imposed on steel and aluminum, which was imposed under a different presidential authority.
In May, the New York -based International Trade Court announced that the definitions are illegal. This decision was suspended to resume the administration.