Q&A – What’s the Deal w/Tariffs After Court Rulings?

As it currently stands... the tariffs that Trump already had in place are the ones that remain in place.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
The Brian Mudshow podcast is driven by Braymanmotor Cars. My
family is a Brayman Motor Cars family. Your family should
be to visit Braymanmotorcars dot com.

Speaker 2 (00:13):
You have questions, Brian has answers. It's time for today's
Q and A of today. This is the Brian mud Show.
Today's Q and A. What's the deal with tariffs after
court rulins? This is brought to you by Unlisted ashes
check Bark collections. Each day I've feature a listener question
sent by one of these methods. You may email me
Brian Mudd at iHeartMedia dot com and me up on

(00:35):
social at Brianmudradio. You may also use the iHeartRadio talk
back feature. Just go to WJNO or Vero Patriot inside
of the iHeartRadio app. We would love it when you
get there, if you would make us you number one
Presa and then the Brian Mudshow podcast my.

Speaker 1 (00:50):
Podcast number two preset that way, We're always there for
you for free on demand, super easy. And while you're
in there, you'll see a little microphone button, see it,
tap it. You may lay down the usage right there,
maybe for a future Q and I. Today's note this
at Brian Mudradio. What's the difference with the tariffs the
court left in place versus the ones they ruled against.
It seems like more selective judicial interference. Okay, So this

(01:16):
note I received prior to the decision yesterday which changed
things put the tariffs right back in place. Here is
the latest from Fox's Jared Halpert. The day after the
US Court of International Trade blocked reciprocal and universal tariffs
imposed by President Trump, a federal appeals court put that
decision on hold, allowing at least temporarily those duties to

(01:39):
continue being collected. We will win this battle in court,
and the President will implement his America First trade policies.
White House Press Secretary Caroline Levitt told reporters the tariff
uncertainty is not slowing down trade talks. Yeah. So certainly
President Trump, who immediately appealed Wednesday's ruling by the US
Court of International Trade that did strike down most of

(02:01):
its imposed tariffs, would agree with the sentiment of the listener,
and also certainly approved of what we saw with the
turn of events with the US Court of Appeals yesterday
at least temporarily staying the lower court's decision. So the
tariffs in place, all of them once again. Now at
issue here is the question as if the president is

(02:23):
allowed to unilaterally imposed tariffs with the use of the
International Emergency Economic Powers Act. So here's the deal on
this thing. The law, which was passed by a Democrat
controlled Congress in nineteen seventy seven signed into law by
Jimmy Carter, provided the president with broad authority to self
regulate economic transactions following the declaration of a national emergency.

(02:48):
And so you could not long went by when presidents
are like, hey, so I just need to say there's
an emergency. Right on that note, the context for the
time end of the law was the nineteen seventies energy crisis,
which resulted in gas shortages throughout the country and also
coincided with the Cold War with Russia. The idea was

(03:10):
that the US needed to become nimbler during times of adversity,
and this law fast tracked away for that to be
able to happen. Now, the flip side of the law,
it obviously became especially tempting for presidents to declare emergencies
to unilaterally implement economic policies, because hey, if I don't
have to deal with Congress, if I just signed something
says emergency, let's do that. So prior to President Trump's

(03:33):
current administration, how many national emergencies do you think had
been declared from nineteen seventy seven until January twentieth of
this year, how many had been signed in the name
of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act? The number over
one hundred, or an average of over two declared national

(03:55):
emergencies per year. Probably most that you had no clue
actually took place. Starting with Jimmy Carter, every president has
invoked the Act to the Claire national Emergencies, allowing for
unilateral economic policies. The most prolific user somebody else who
was prolific at certain things in the Oval office. See

(04:19):
Joel cracking up. He was its prolific. A lot of
you might Joel wants to do a impersonation here, I
feel your pain. Yes, he was prolificate at things like
that I did not have sexual relations with that woman.
He was prolific and lying about things like that. Yeah.

(04:42):
Bill Clinton has been the most pervasive user. He used
it over thirty times. But it wasn't just that he
did it a lot, it was how he did it.
And I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about the
emergency powers, national runds. Joel's reaction was not constructive, so
he expanded it. He expanded it to all matters of

(05:04):
foreign policy. In fact, if you take a look at
what's happened over time with usage of this act, we
had thirty nine previously declared national emergencies that were technically
still in place on inauguration day this year. So about
all this. President Trump successfully used the IEEPA to declare

(05:26):
a national emergency ten times during his first term as president,
with three establishing economic restrictions with foreign governments that would
kind of be like the most similar to efforts attempted
with his Liberation Day tariffs and downs. April second, you
had Iranian sanctions after withdrawing from the Iran nuclear deal

(05:46):
that he declared a national emergency about. He froze the
Venezuelan government's property held in US accounts due to political repression,
and also limited access of these apps for data collection,
TikTok and we chat specifically. Okay, so those were all
done by Trump the first time around using the same law,

(06:09):
and all those clear to legal scrutiny. So what has
theoretically changed now because didn't Trump and post tariffs during
its first term without a problem. Well, the answer is yes,
but he did go about it differently. The terrorists President
Trump imposed in its first term came with a without
a declared national emergency, but rather the use of the

(06:29):
Trade Act of nineteen seventy four, and that allows a
president to negotiate trade deals, tariff rates, and to address
unfair trade practices now without getting overly wonky. It had
already been legally determined that China was a currency manipulator
and had engaged in unfair trade practices. That was also

(06:52):
through various different market manipulations, so that is what is different.
This time. President Trump has sought to span the reach
of the ieepa authority to impose tariffs at will, and
that has actually not happened before. In the decision written
by the Court of International Trade, they stated the Worldwide

(07:13):
and Retaliatory Tariff orders exceed any authority granted to the
President by ie PA to regulate importation by means of tariffs,
and a separate order for targeted tariffs issued against Canada,
Mexico and China, in which President Trump's order declared a
drug trafficking emergency as the catalyst for the imposed tariffs.

(07:34):
The judges stated that the administration's orders fail because they
do not deal with the threats set forth in the orders.
In other words, there's no indication that the tariffs were
imposed really to curved drugs. They failed to show how
it would do that. In other words, there's nothing inherent
about the tariffs that just kind of meet the mark

(07:57):
of the National Emergency Law year. Now, you might agree
or disagree with that decision, but what has been attempted
here by President Trump by this administration is unprecedented. It
would push the use of that law into a place
that it's never gone before. Obviously, the International Trade Court

(08:18):
was not comfortable with that. So we will see where
the ball lands once everything is done. What they were
willing to live in place where the original Trump tariffs,
which included the Chinese tariffs from his first administration, import
tariffs on imports on aluminium end Steele and also imported automobiles.
But again, because of the stay of that decision, all

(08:40):
of the Trump tariffs, including the Liberation Day tariffs, they
are in place once again. So now we will wait,
watch and see what will be