The original ruling was from a panel of 3 judges from the total 9 Judges on the Court of International Trade.
Was it an actual Appeal Court, or an En Banc hearing (= all the Judges).
The judgement seems off to me - because of the timings. Either the President has the power to impose tariffs or he doesn't. If he doesn't, why did anyone think he did? If he does, you can't just recind that right because he's doing it 'a bit too much'. It makes no sense.
Logic is:
Trump’s tariffs are universal and permanent.
If law he is relying on permits that then it is unconstitutional as Congress doesn’t have the right to delegate power.
If the rights he has been granted under the law are limited then he has exceeded them
For now, these can be sourced indirectly. But this leaves the west - and particularly Europe - with a large strategic problem. We simply don't have the existing mass manufacturing capacity to replace this.
That needs to change.
China has stopped selling Mavic drones to 🇺🇦Ukraine, instead supplying them to the 🇷🇺Russian Federation, – Zelensky.
These drones are even manufactured on Russian lines with the presence of Chinese specialists. The information was confirmed by European intelligence, noting that China has also restricted the sale of parts for drones to the West. The Chinese Foreign Ministry denies this. https://x.com/front_ukrainian/status/1928076281138032946
'We are going to launch a crypto revolution in Britain.'
Reform UK Leader Nigel Farage has unveiled a new initiative — the Crypto Assets and Digital Finance Bill — which his party has drafted and will actively campaign for.
I wonder if there was someone in 1630s Amsterdam who proclaimed they were going to launch a "Tulip Revolution".
It does show that Farage is willing to take risks, think outside the box & present a bold vision.
It might also lead to a flood of donations from Crypto Bros, which might be very helpful for Reform's finances.
As an ex-metals trader, he understands pump and dump.
'We are going to launch a crypto revolution in Britain.'
Reform UK Leader Nigel Farage has unveiled a new initiative — the Crypto Assets and Digital Finance Bill — which his party has drafted and will actively campaign for.
I wonder if there was someone in 1630s Amsterdam who proclaimed they were going to launch a "Tulip Revolution".
It does show that Farage is willing to take risks, think outside the box & present a bold vision.
It might also lead to a flood of donations from Crypto Bros, which might be very helpful for Reform's finances.
The electoral commission may take a pretty dim view, if donors can not be identified or validated though
TfL's reaction is simply hilarious. We are seeing two things here:
(1) Classic institutional embarrassment at being caught out - so their first reaction is to close ranks and try and shoot the messenger. We have seen this so many times before, like with the Post Office, the National Coal Board, the Met, South Yorkshire police, Rotherham and the NHS scandals. The fact this never works, looks petulant and tone-deaf, and always makez it worse never seems to change this fascinating psychological behaviour of human in-groups. (2) Sadiq Khan is really pissed off about it. TfL is his plaything, for his political purposes and no-one else's, and is thoroughly irritated that a rival like Jenrick has beaten him at his own game - particularly since he said his objective was to expose his failings. Of course, any "permission" (lol) would never have been granted if requested. Since TfL is controlled by the Mayor this is setting the tone from the top down.
TfL will be forced to respond, and Sadiq can only hope now he makes himself look less of a tit than usual in doing it. Through gritted teeth.
WRT (1), I think Kipling’s General Summary is one of the best explanations for human behaviour I’ve ever read.
“We are very slightly changed, from the semi-apes that ranged, India’s prehistoric clay…”
So often, institutional behaviour is cruel, stupid, and self-defeating.
There was a lot of reporting about Trump's loss in the Court of International Trade, and the subsequent freezing of that judgement by the Appeals Court, but Trump has also suffered a second loss related to the tariffs in another court.
The second strike against the president’s use of the emergency powers act came in a decision by U.S. District Judge Rudolph Contreras in federal court in D.C.
In a case brought by two small businesses, Learning Resources and hand2mind, Contreras rejected the government’s request to transfer the case to the [Court of International Trade] in New York. The plaintiffs would suffer “irreparable harm” and an “existential threat” to their businesses if the tariffs were allowed to stand.
“This case is not about tariffs qua tariffs. It is about whether IEEPA enables the president to unilaterally impose, revoke, pause, reinstate, and adjust tariffs to reorder the global economy. The Court agrees with Plaintiffs that it does not,” Contreras wrote, using the acronym for the emergency powers act.
There was a lot of reporting about Trump's loss in the Court of International Trade, and the subsequent freezing of that judgement by the Appeals Court, but Trump has also suffered a second loss related to the tariffs in another court.
The second strike against the president’s use of the emergency powers act came in a decision by U.S. District Judge Rudolph Contreras in federal court in D.C.
In a case brought by two small businesses, Learning Resources and hand2mind, Contreras rejected the government’s request to transfer the case to the [Court of International Trade] in New York. The plaintiffs would suffer “irreparable harm” and an “existential threat” to their businesses if the tariffs were allowed to stand.
“This case is not about tariffs qua tariffs. It is about whether IEEPA enables the president to unilaterally impose, revoke, pause, reinstate, and adjust tariffs to reorder the global economy. The Court agrees with Plaintiffs that it does not,” Contreras wrote, using the acronym for the emergency powers act.
Even the Guardian is talking about fare dodgers and Robert Jenrick's efforts to confront them.
"Robert Jenrick turns vigilante in bid to tackle London’s fare dodgers Tory MP claims ‘law breaking is out of control’ in video in which he accosts travellers on the underground"
Yes this looks like a brilliant stunt/way of raising awareness (delete as appropriate). Other politicians will be fuming they didn't think of it first.
It's weird, but it does seem like the world is coming down to Libdems v Reform.
It's like choosing between syphilis and gonorrhea.
I think it is a particularly deep anti Liberal prejudice that regards that choice between opposites as some kind of a twofer.
Well not really. I can't claim personal experience, but gonorrhea is surely much preferable to syphilis. This analogy isn't about a choice between two equally bad optioms but about a choice between a bad option and a worse one.
Does he not remember who broke Britain? If he can't remember he must have Biden levels of age related neurological disorder.
Am I wrong to find Jenrick even less appealing than Farage?
Voters are probably more concerned about what anyone's going to do about it than who was to blame 15 years ago.
17 years ago surely?
For whatever reason, we've never really recovered from Brown's financial crisis - that's what broke this country more than anything.
We should have used it as an opportunity to deregulate throughout the economy, but especially on planning, and build far more houses and infrastructure. Instead, we adopted soft-socialism with ever rising taxes and have suffered the inevitable stagnation and slow decline.
It's weird, but it does seem like the world is coming down to Libdems v Reform.
It's like choosing between syphilis and gonorrhea.
I think it is a particularly deep anti Liberal prejudice that regards that choice between opposites as some kind of a twofer.
Well not really. I can't claim personal experience, but gonorrhea is surely much preferable to syphilis. This analogy isn't about a choice between two equally bad optioms but about a choice between a bad option and a worse one.
Plato wasn’t a dumb twat who sold the Postmasters down the river and took no accoutability, and whose approach to election campaigning is to enact multiple pratfalls, a la Norman Wisdom, or was he ?
Does he not remember who broke Britain? If he can't remember he must have Biden levels of age related neurological disorder.
Am I wrong to find Jenrick even less appealing than Farage?
Voters are probably more concerned about what anyone's going to do about it than who was to blame 15 years ago.
17 years ago surely?
For whatever reason, we've never really recovered from Brown's financial crisis - that's what broke this country more than anything.
We should have used it as an opportunity to deregulate throughout the economy, but especially on planning, and build far more houses and infrastructure. Instead, we adopted soft-socialism with ever rising taxes and have suffered the inevitable stagnation and slow decline.
The global financial crisis driven by the subprime mortgage debt mountain. To call that Brown’s crisis is disingenuous. It was a game of global pass the parcel that had been playing out for years. Tory, Labour, Thatcherite, Wet, Socialist, they all played it.
Who would have bought the houses? It was a credit crunch. What’s more austerity, much as it was and is the wrong choice is not ‘soft socialism’. I agree a ‘new deal’ approach wrt infrastructure may have been a more optimal response than austerity.
Are you able to see anything from outside your narrow prejudices?
There was a lot of reporting about Trump's loss in the Court of International Trade, and the subsequent freezing of that judgement by the Appeals Court, but Trump has also suffered a second loss related to the tariffs in another court.
The second strike against the president’s use of the emergency powers act came in a decision by U.S. District Judge Rudolph Contreras in federal court in D.C.
In a case brought by two small businesses, Learning Resources and hand2mind, Contreras rejected the government’s request to transfer the case to the [Court of International Trade] in New York. The plaintiffs would suffer “irreparable harm” and an “existential threat” to their businesses if the tariffs were allowed to stand.
“This case is not about tariffs qua tariffs. It is about whether IEEPA enables the president to unilaterally impose, revoke, pause, reinstate, and adjust tariffs to reorder the global economy. The Court agrees with Plaintiffs that it does not,” Contreras wrote, using the acronym for the emergency powers act.
There was a lot of reporting about Trump's loss in the Court of International Trade, and the subsequent freezing of that judgement by the Appeals Court, but Trump has also suffered a second loss related to the tariffs in another court.
The second strike against the president’s use of the emergency powers act came in a decision by U.S. District Judge Rudolph Contreras in federal court in D.C.
In a case brought by two small businesses, Learning Resources and hand2mind, Contreras rejected the government’s request to transfer the case to the [Court of International Trade] in New York. The plaintiffs would suffer “irreparable harm” and an “existential threat” to their businesses if the tariffs were allowed to stand.
“This case is not about tariffs qua tariffs. It is about whether IEEPA enables the president to unilaterally impose, revoke, pause, reinstate, and adjust tariffs to reorder the global economy. The Court agrees with Plaintiffs that it does not,” Contreras wrote, using the acronym for the emergency powers act.
That's slightly more problematic. Can the courts rule on the irrationality of presidential decisions which would otherwise be legal ?
An interesting question for the SC.
Wednesbury?
Wednesbury Unreasonableness is an English Courts concept. Don't think they have the same in the US. On the face of the evidence as presented in the UK media I DON'T think the administration's actions, would fail the Wednesbury test.
After all, there has not been any serious challenge of the actions of the UK Chancellor since July 2024 and her actions have been self-evidently infinitely more damaging that anythingt Trump has done. The Wednesbury Test has to be related to actions so perverse that no right thinking person could think they were reasonable. It isn't stretching things too far to say that just about embaces govrnment policy since July 2025.
For Liz Truss with the benefit of hindsight she should have given herself more time and sacked just about all of the top shelf Civil Servants, pour encourager les autres.
Does he not remember who broke Britain? If he can't remember he must have Biden levels of age related neurological disorder.
Am I wrong to find Jenrick even less appealing than Farage?
Voters are probably more concerned about what anyone's going to do about it than who was to blame 15 years ago.
17 years ago surely?
For whatever reason, we've never really recovered from Brown's financial crisis - that's what broke this country more than anything.
We should have used it as an opportunity to deregulate throughout the economy, but especially on planning, and build far more houses and infrastructure. Instead, we adopted soft-socialism with ever rising taxes and have suffered the inevitable stagnation and slow decline.
Ironically this government, which is decried as useless compared with the Blair/Brown one, is actually making some steps in that direction. Inadequate though they may be.
Ann has switched parties to what she sees as a purer more orthodox version of conservatism ie from Tory to Reform much like she switched churches from the C of E to the Roman Catholic church for what she saw as a purer more orthodox form of Christianity after the C of E synod approved women priests
She also switched from Tory to the Brexit Party (aka Reform) a long time ago - was it 2019?, so why would she anything about future Conservative success.
Comments
https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R48435
But it must legislate to do so.
It hasn't.
Instead, Trump is relying on an emergency power, which Congress has waived its requirement to review for 12 months using a procedural trick.
Which is why the car and steel tariffs were allowed to stand by the court decision.
But this leaves the west - and particularly Europe - with a large strategic problem.
We simply don't have the existing mass manufacturing capacity to replace this.
That needs to change.
China has stopped selling Mavic drones to 🇺🇦Ukraine, instead supplying them to the 🇷🇺Russian Federation, – Zelensky.
These drones are even manufactured on Russian lines with the presence of Chinese specialists. The information was confirmed by European intelligence, noting that China has also restricted the sale of parts for drones to the West. The Chinese Foreign Ministry denies this.
https://x.com/front_ukrainian/status/1928076281138032946
Sir Drears speech really hit the spot then !
https://x.com/electionmapsuk/status/1928222981307703731?s=61
Lib Dem’s held a seat in Lewes too
https://x.com/electionmapsuk/status/1928227350237352042?s=61
It's like choosing between syphilis and gonorrhea.
Newhaven North, LEWES DC
LIB DEM HOLD
LDM, 697, 51.7%
Refuk, 389, 28.9%
Green, 122, 9.1%
Con, 59, 4.4%
Ind, 57, 4.2%
Lab, 23, 1.7%
“We are very slightly changed, from the semi-apes that ranged, India’s prehistoric clay…”
So often, institutional behaviour is cruel, stupid, and self-defeating.
Great Reform fan that he is. 😊
The second strike against the president’s use of the emergency powers act came in a decision by U.S. District Judge Rudolph Contreras in federal court in D.C.
In a case brought by two small businesses, Learning Resources and hand2mind, Contreras rejected the government’s request to transfer the case to the [Court of International Trade] in New York. The plaintiffs would suffer “irreparable harm” and an “existential threat” to their businesses if the tariffs were allowed to stand.
“This case is not about tariffs qua tariffs. It is about whether IEEPA enables the president to unilaterally impose, revoke, pause, reinstate, and adjust tariffs to reorder the global economy. The Court agrees with Plaintiffs that it does not,” Contreras wrote, using the acronym for the emergency powers act.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2025/05/29/trump-tariff-trade-emergency-powers-court/
Can the courts rule on the irrationality of presidential decisions which would otherwise be legal ?
An interesting question for the SC.
Other politicians will be fuming they didn't think of it first.
Hegseth orders Pentagon’s testing office staff cut by more than half
https://thehill.com/policy/defense/5324874-reduction-pentagon-test-office/
For whatever reason, we've never really recovered from Brown's financial crisis - that's what broke this country more than anything.
We should have used it as an opportunity to deregulate throughout the economy, but especially on planning, and build far more houses and infrastructure. Instead, we adopted soft-socialism with ever rising taxes and have suffered the inevitable stagnation and slow decline.
NEW THREAD
Who would have bought the houses? It was a credit crunch. What’s more austerity, much as it was and is the wrong choice is not ‘soft socialism’. I agree a ‘new deal’ approach wrt infrastructure may have been a more optimal response than austerity.
Are you able to see anything from outside your narrow prejudices?
After all, there has not been any serious challenge of the actions of the UK Chancellor since July 2024 and her actions have been self-evidently infinitely more damaging that anythingt Trump has done. The Wednesbury Test has to be related to actions so perverse that no right thinking person could think they were reasonable. It isn't stretching things too far to say that just about embaces govrnment policy since July 2025.
For Liz Truss with the benefit of hindsight she should have given herself more time and sacked just about all of the top shelf Civil Servants, pour encourager les autres.
Inadequate though they may be.