In a significant development, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has temporarily reinstated President Donald Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariffs, following a lower court’s ruling that deemed them unconstitutional. This move introduces a new layer of complexity to the ongoing legal discourse surrounding executive authority in trade matters.

On May 28, the U.S. Court of International Trade ruled that President Trump had overstepped his authority by invoking the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose sweeping tariffs on imports from countries including China, Canada, and Mexico. The court emphasized that the Constitution grants Congress, not the President, the power to regulate foreign commerce and levy tariffs.

The administration promptly appealed the decision, leading the Federal Circuit to issue a temporary stay on the lower court’s ruling. This stay allows the tariffs to remain in effect while the appellate court reviews the case. Plaintiffs have been directed to respond by June 5, with the administration’s reply due by June 9.

The return of the tariffs has sparked a wide range of responses. Proponents view them as vital instruments for shielding U.S. industries and correcting unfair trade practices. On the other hand, detractors argue that invoking the IEEPA for such economic measures poses a constitutional risk, potentially eroding the balance of powers between the executive branch and Congress.

Economists warn that the uncertainty surrounding the tariffs could have ripple effects on global markets and trade negotiations. Businesses, particularly small enterprises reliant on imported goods, express concerns over increased costs and supply chain disruptions.

As the legal battle unfolds, the case underscores the ongoing tension between executive action and legislative authority in shaping U.S. trade policy.