Peter Navarro claimed that the justices affirmed the use of laws other than the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to set tariffs.
by RAY LEWIS | The National News DeskWhite House trade advisor Peter Navarro said Wednesday that the Supreme Court's ruling against the administration's tariffs was the "best possible outcome." White House trade advisor Peter Navarro called the Supreme Court’s ruling against the administration’s tariffs the “best possible outcome” on Wednesday.
that the justices, who determined last month that tariffs set through the International Emergency Economic Powers Act are illegal, affirmed the use of other laws to impose import taxes. “Even though we lost the IEEPA tariffs, it was the best possible outcome because the justices ratified and affirmed the use of every other statute we’ve been using to implement tariffs,” Navarro claimed.’s use of other laws to set tariffs. Chief John Roberts wrote in the majority opinion that the justices don’t speculate about hypothetical cases, like those involving future tariffs set through other statutes. “Our task today is to decide only whether the power to ‘regulate ... importation,’ as granted to the President in IEEPA, embraces the power to impose tariffs,” Roberts said. “It does not.” Many of Trump’s tariffs were set through IEEPA. The president announced soon after the Supreme Court’s ruling that he would impose them through other laws, though, like section 122 of the 1974 Trade Act. The statute allows presidents to set import taxes to address “large and serious” deficits in the balance of payments, an accounting system based on corresponding debts and credits. Trump said in his proclamation, issued immediately after the Supreme Court’s ruling, that tariffs are needed to deal with balance-of-payment issues and to protect the U.S.’s economy and national security. “After considering the information, opinions, and recommendations that have been provided to me by senior officials, among other relevant information and considerations, I find that fundamental international payments problems within the meaning of section 122 exist; that those problems significantly harm United States national interests, including economic and national security interests; and that special measures to restrict imports are required to address those problems, as authorized by section 122,” Trump claimed.that other countries harmed the U.S. through previous trade deals – a disputable point – but many economists have found his tariffs to be much more damaging. Many businesses have passed on the higher costs for materials to consumers, who will likely miss any refunds for the illegal taxes. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said last month that lawsuits for the reimbursements could take years to resolve, adding that he had a “feeling the American people won’t see" any money won by companies.EXCLUSIVE VIDEO: Officer shoots and kills suspect after being threatened with weapon SAN ANTONIO - An investigation is underway for a officer-involved shooting involving a Castle Hills Police detective.The incident happened just after 8 a.m. Wednesday on the access road of Northwest Loop 410 and San PedSAN ANTONIO - This morning, closing arguments will be heard in the capital murder trial of Christopher Preciado. He is the man accused in the killing of a young couple and their unborn baby.New state rules that eliminate natural smokeable hemp products and increase licensing fees will go into effect at the end of the month. Hemp industry leaders say these new regulations will eliminate a majority of their iPOLL: Do you support the installation of border buoys? Contractors have begun installing a 17-mile stretch of new cylindrical buoys in the Rio Grande River to prevent illegal crossings from Mexico.These are the first of 536 miles of buoys that the federal government plans
United States Latest News, United States Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Supreme Court considers allowing Trump administration to revive restrictive immigration policyThe Supreme Court grappled Tuesday with an immigration policy that has been used to turn back migrants seeking asylum at the U.S.-Mexico border and whether the Trump administration should be able to revive it. Some conservative justices seemed receptive to the Justice Department's push to overturn a ruling against the practice known as metering.
Read more »
Supreme Court considers letting Trump administration revive restrictive immigration asylum policyThe Supreme Court grappled Tuesday with an immigration policy that has been used to turn back migrants seeking asylum at the U.S.-Mexico border and whether the Trump administration should be able to revive it.
Read more »
Supreme Court considers letting Trump administration revive restrictive immigration asylum policyAdvocates say the policy created a humanitarian crisis during Trump’s first term.
Read more »
Supreme Court considers letting Trump administration revive restrictive immigration asylum policyAva-joye Burnett is an award-winning journalist who joined Scripps News in April of 2023. Prior to Scripps News, Ava-joye spent seven years as a general assignment reporter at CBS Baltimore (WJZ).
Read more »
Supreme Court considers letting Trump administration revive restrictive immigration asylum policyThe Supreme Court grappled Tuesday with an immigration policy that has been used to turn back migrants seeking asylum at the U.S.-Mexico border and whether the Trump administration should be able to revive it.
Read more »
Supreme Court considers letting Trump administration revive restrictive immigration asylum policyThe Supreme Court grappled Tuesday with an immigration policy that has been used to turn back migrants seeking asylum at the U.S.-Mexico border and whether the Trump administration should be able to revive it.
Read more »