After Another Delay, Trump's China Tariffs Look Even Less Like a Legitimate 'Emergency'
The words national emergency are not a magic spell that presidents can utter to unlock unlimited legislative powers for themselves.

To place huge new tariffs on imports from China, President Donald Trump claimed that those transactions are "an unusual and extraordinary threat" to the United States.
It's a threat that the White House now says it can put off addressing for another 90 days.
On Monday, Trump again postponed the enforcement of his threatened 30 percent tariffs on imports from China, which were set to resume on Tuesday after being previously postponed in May. In a new executive order, Trump said the United States "continues to have discussions" with China "to address the lack of trade reciprocity in our economic relationship and our resulting national and economic security concerns."
Elsewhere in the same executive order, Trump reiterated the claim that trade with China poses "an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security" of the country.
The idea that mutually beneficial trade between people or businesses in different countries is some sort of national security threat is nonsense, of course. But, even if you accept Trump's premise that trade with China is an urgent threat requiring extraordinary executive powers, then how can it be acceptable to wait three more months before applying the president's chosen remedy?
This is not just a rhetorical point but a question that's central to the legality of the tariffs. In front of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit last month, the Trump administration's lawyer told skeptical judges that the president's tariff powers rested upon the existence of an "unusual threat" that the president was taking action to "deal with."
The latest delay in the China tariffs, then, seems to directly undermine that claim. If Trump wants to use the threat of tariffs to negotiate a new trade deal with China, fine, but then that's not an emergency—and, as a result, those tariffs cannot be implemented with the emergency powers the president is currently claiming.
Of course, the delay is good news in the sense that it means three more months will pass before Americans will have to pay those import taxes—though the move does create additional uncertainty for any business that buys goods, parts, or raw materials from China. It also allows more time for the world's two largest economies to reach a deal that will give Trump an off-ramp from this self-destructive trade war. Hopefully he finds one.
The words national emergency are not a magic spell that presidents can utter to unlock unlimited legislative powers for themselves. If Trump wants to impose sweeping tariffs on imports from China and the rest of the globe, he should have to go through the proper steps to do so—which means going to Congress and getting those taxes passed into law.
Until that happens, every court should reject this "national emergency" as the obvious nonsense that it is.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
stop whining.
Stop slaving.
dying to see how one is the other.
He’s whining because Trump is winning.
Poor Eric
Remember when you voted for Bush/Cheney to ship manufacturing jobs to China?? That was weird, right??
I never voted for Bush/Cheney. I voted Badnarik in 2004 and was not eligible in 2000. Was interesting to see members of team W back Kamala in 2024.
What happened to your original account?
Bush voted for Trump because the family still believes George P Bush can become governor at some point…it’s pretty pathetic. Btw, what do Clinton, Trump, and Paxton all have in common?? They had the temerity to beat a Bush…so they were impeached!
Badnarik believed that, "Peaceful immigrants should be allowed to enter the US at conveniently located Customs and Immigration stations, subject only to brief vetting to ensure that they are not terrorists or criminals, and reasonable consideration of the nation's ability to assimilate them."
"The words national emergency are not a magic spell that presidents can utter to unlock unlimited legislative powers for themselves."
I beg to differ! Claiming a national emergency has a great deal in common with magic spells. Coupled with the tendency of the courts to respond very slowly to alleged Executive violations and the willingness of tyrants to ignore court orders and decisions, it turns out that "justice delayed is justice denied" is not just a caveat, it's an Executive strategy! And it also seems to be a very successful and effective one at that!
Seek treatment.
Did you complain when Democrats declared bogus national emergencies? Yes you did, but the narrative says you didn't and that overrides basic facts. That means you're a hypocrite who only complains about Trump, and that invalidates your criticism. Not only that but it makes whatever Trump does ok because you're a poo-poo head.
Trump projects American power outwards. You democrats project American power inwards, to oppress Americans.
You applauded and/or defended Biden’s despotic use of powers, yet when Trump uses those powers, within the constraints of the constitution, to help Americans, you seethe and rage (drunkenly).
Oh. So L.A. and D.C. are outward?
And, in case you didn't know, tariffs are paid by American consumers. Sounds pretty inward to me.
The you have Ukraine and Gaza, which were supposed to be outward projections solved with a day or two, and possibly some fools even believed that, but Trump's blustering on both fronts has yielded exactly zero progress in seven months.
How's that outward thesis doing so far?
Trump projects American power outwards. You democrats project American power inwards, to oppress Americans.
What planet do you live on? Have you looked out the window lately? Who are those masked men oppressing Americans inside American cities? Are they Democrats?
Trump has other powers granted by congress that he can use to negotiate trade agreements so there will be no practical effect of this litigation. But the larger issue is that Eric seems to think that skeptical judges are in a position to define an emergency when the president has sole authority to do so. I don't see how they can legitimately rule on the definition of a word. Presumably they could declare that authority to be unconstitutional but that opens up a big can of worms and would likely be stayed while the case drags through the system. This is just a dumb thing to obsess about.
I don't see how they can legitimately rule on the definition of a word.
They do all the time.
Trump has other powers granted by congress that he can use to negotiate trade agreements
This is true, but these other laws contains criteria/approval and limitations which may be why IEEPA was the law chosen for exploitation by the Trump administration.
Yes courts make shit up all of the time but as I understand it the statute gives the president sole authority to define an emergency. This is not some civil lawsuit wherein a district court judge can just pull shit out of his ass and call it a law. The judiciary could find Trump's authority to be defective in some way but they can't just declare "emergency" to mean what they want it to mean which seems to be Eric's fever dream. SCOTUS would really have no choice but to stay the order. I'm open to the argument that congress has erred in giving the executive ever expanding authority and the Court could force them to do their job. But it seems to me that Trump's declaration is legitimate under current law and the court has no jurisdiction to second guess his judgement. They may have the authority to strike down the law itself but the merits of the law don't seem to be the question here, only Trump's application of it.
Thanks for the clarification.
The thing is, not everything one doesn't like classifies as a national emergency. Fentanyl is a national emergency, imbalance of trade is a national emergency, bums on the street in DC are a national emergency, vandals in LA are a national emergency.... etc. At some point, Trump becomes the the boy who cried wolf. These are all chronic situations.
bin Laden's planes were a true emergency requiring quick action and unusual powers. Same for flooding of the Mississippi flood plains in 1993. If congress won't get off its collective butt and fix the chronic stuff, then the solution is to elect different reps and senators, not to allow POTUS to stretch legislation beyond all recognition (think "major questions" doctrine). It was wrong when Biden tried to use COVID statues to cancel student debt, and it's wrong when Trump uses emergency trade authorization to change a long term structural situation.
Violent crime and fentanyl deaths spiked in 2020 because of Trump’s failures. Biden had both trending down by 2023.
Violent crime dropped off a cliff in 2020 because everyone was confined to their houses. It "spiked" (i.e. returned to normal) when people were allowed back outside.
It has been trending downwards for decades and has nothing to do with who is in the White House.
PPP is to blame…Trump is to blame because he just splooged dollars to as many people as possible including thugs.
Just to be clear, there's no such thing as presidential abuse of power in declaring spurious "emergencies" as simple power grabs? Judges, too, have wide discretion in many matters, but that discretion can be abused, leading to a reversal on appeal.
Is the presidential "emergency" power capable of abuse? Are you saying neither the judiciary nor the Congress can rein in executive profligacy in declaring emergencies? That Trump (and, of course, his predecessors, who didn't abuse them) already had the dictatorial powers he is now claiming?
Absolutely the judiciary and congress can rein in the power grab; that's the way the system was designed: recall "checks and balances" that you learned about in school. All three branches (including both houses of congress) need to be in agreement to get anything done. But Congress needs to act, which they are afraid to do. Biden did it first? And Obama and his "pen and phone", and many others previously I expect. I'm not keeping score of who pushed it furthest, but the current POTUS is really pushing it.
Chinese TACO Tuesday!
Yes, but 4-D chess, best businessman ever, winning, and stuff.
He is winning, and so are Americans. You democrats hate that. Just like you hate this country.
Tariffs make products more expensive and worse! With Trump we are losing and that’s what he wants because his best state is West Virginia which is full of losers!
What exactly is he winning? Not the deficit. Not Gaza. Not Ukraine. Pardoning the worst among us on a daily basis for political reasons. But I guess it's a win when you can use public office as a personal profit center with no excuses required. Let's all do crypto! And, if you've got the bribe money, he'll gladly carve out exceptions for YOUR company. Win, win, win. Just like all dictators. Lose, lose, lose, just like all subject populations.
Yeah it was horrible when Trump pardoned Fauci and Hunter. Oh wait...
So because Team D made a mockery of presidential pardons it's "only fair" that Team R gets to make an even bigger mockery of it?
Fauci committed no crimes and neither Trump nor anyone named any. Biden pardoned him because he was a lifelong dedicated public servant of the highest honor and regard, none of which mattered to Trump who had a rabid yokel population to appease, so Biden saved Fauci from the threat of investigation for no articulable crime. NAME FAUCI'S CRIME, EH? Hunter Biden was prosecuted by a special Trump appointee WHOM JOE BIDEN NEVER REMOVED as Trump would have, who withdrew a plea deal typical in such cases, on a gun charge NO RIGHT WING GUN NUT WOULD EVER CONDONE AGAINST ONE OF THEIR OWN. So yeah, Hunter did commit crimes, but not the kind anyone else does big time for. Compare that to pardoning Proud Boys and Oath Keepers leaders CONVICTED BY JURIES in the jurisdictions where their crimes were committed. Avowed exponents of violent overthrow of constitutional government who did just that on Trump's behalf on J6. False equivalence much?
Eric is a simpleton when it comes to tariffs.
Eric is ChatGPT, ordered to produce dissenting material, when it comes to tariffs.
China will not trade rare earths or the other named strategic materials to the US military or its contractors at any price - forever. The more Trump threatens and blusters that, the more certain China will be to just add one more element to the will not trade list. The more Trump opens his mouth re that issue, the more certain it is that he will make things worse.
All brought to you by Democrats UN-Constitutional Legislation.
Say. Where are those bill proposals to *repeal* FDR's[D] and Carters[D] E.O. Tariff legislation????????? Huh?
Are the TDS BS'ers interested in a solution or are they just here to BS-cry about Trump specifically?
...like the party-partisan hacks they are ([Our][WE] Identify-as mob RULES!).