Core Points - A federal appeals court has temporarily allowed several tariffs imposed by Trump on international trade partners to remain in effect [1] - The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit stated that the decisions and permanent injunctions made by the International Trade Court will be temporarily suspended until further notice [1] - The lower court's ruling will be delayed at least until June 9, when both parties will submit legal arguments regarding the suspension of the case [1] Summary by Sections - **Court Ruling**: The appeals court's decision indicates a pause on the lower court's ruling that questioned Trump's authority to impose tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act [1] - **Next Steps**: The appeals court will weigh the issues in the case and consider whether to extend the suspension of the lower court's decisions [1] - **Legal Context**: The International Trade Court had previously ruled that Trump's use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act did not grant him unlimited tariff authority [1]

Core Viewpoint - The U.S. International Trade Court has blocked President Trump's tariff policy, ruling that the president overstepped his authority by imposing tariffs on countries with trade surpluses with the U.S. [2][4] Group 1: Court Ruling and Implications - The court's 49-page ruling prohibits the Trump administration from enforcing tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), stating that the Act does not grant the president the authority to issue global tariffs or retaliatory tariffs [4][5] - The ruling halts the implementation of a 10% universal tariff on most U.S. imports and certain tariffs on China, Mexico, and Canada, but does not affect the 25% tariffs on the automotive and steel industries [4][6] - This ruling is considered one of the most significant judicial setbacks for the Trump administration, effectively nullifying the legal basis for the tariff strategy during his second term [6][7] Group 2: Future Trade Negotiations - The ruling complicates ongoing trade negotiations with approximately 18 countries, as the Trump administration has relied on the "reciprocal tariffs" as leverage [6][7] - Experts believe that the court's decision may lead trade partners to halt further concessions until there is a clearer legal framework from the U.S. judicial system regarding tariff disputes [7][8] Group 3: Potential Outcomes and Strategies - If the Trump administration's appeal is unsuccessful, it could significantly undermine the strategy of using high tariffs to compel trade partners to make concessions and reduce the trade deficit [8][9] - Analysts suggest that the administration may seek alternative legal avenues to impose tariffs, potentially using different legal justifications to circumvent the court's ruling [9]

美国联邦法院表示，特朗普援引《国际紧急经济权力法》征收关税是越权行为。 ...

Core Viewpoint - A coalition of 12 U.S. states has filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration, alleging that its tariff policies are unlawful, with a court hearing scheduled for May 21 [1] Group 1: Legal Arguments - The plaintiffs argue that the Trump administration has misinterpreted the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, leading to baseless tariff impositions [1] - The Act specifies that a national emergency can only be declared under unusual and extreme circumstances, which the current trade situation does not meet [1] - The defense contends that tariffs are not a tax issue but a means to regulate international trade, asserting that Trump has the authority to declare a national emergency and implement measures without court interference [1] Group 2: Current Challenges - The Trump administration's tariff policies are currently facing at least seven judicial challenges [1]

Group 1 - Multiple states in the U.S., including New York, Arizona, and California, have filed lawsuits against the Trump administration's tariff policies, seeking to declare them illegal [1] - New York Attorney General Letitia James stated that the President does not have the authority to arbitrarily raise taxes, which is a central argument in the lawsuits [1] - California's Governor Gavin Newsom initiated a lawsuit claiming the Trump administration's use of tariffs is unlawful, marking the first state-level challenge to the tariff policies [1]