More than 20 states sue over new global tariffs Trump imposed after his stinging Supreme Court loss
Washington (AP): Some two dozen states challenged President Donald Trump's new global tariffs on Thursday, filing a lawsuit over import taxes he imposed after a stinging loss at the Supreme Court.
The Democratic attorneys general leading the suit argue that Trump is overstepping his power with planned 15% tariffs on much of the world.
Trump has said the tariffs are essential to reduce America's longstanding trade deficits. He imposed duties under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 after the Supreme Court struck down tariffs he imposed last year under an emergency powers law.
Section 122, which has never been invoked, allows the president to impose tariffs of up to 15%, though they're limited to five months unless extended by Congress.
The lawsuit is led by attorneys general from Oregon, Arizona, California and New York.
The states argue that Section 122 was intended to be used only in specific, limited circumstances and does not give Trump authority to impose sweeping import taxes. It also contends the tariffs will drive up costs for states, businesses and consumers.
Many of those states also successfully sued over Trump's tariffs imposed under a different law: the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA).
Four days after the Supreme Court struck down his sweeping IEEPA tariffs Feb. 20, Trump invoked Section 122 to slap 10% tariffs on foreign goods. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessant told CNBC on Wednesday that the administration would raise the levies to the 15% limit this week.
The Democratic states and other critics say the president can't use Section 122 as a replacement for the defunct tariffs to combat the trade deficit.
The Section 122 provision is aimed at what it calls “fundamental international payments problems".
At issue is whether that wording covers trade deficits, the gap between what the US sells other countries and what it buys from them.
Section 122 arose from the financial crises that emerged in the 1960s and 1970s when the US dollar was tied to gold. Other countries were dumping dollars in exchange for gold at a set rate, risking a collapse of the US currency and chaos in financial markets.
But the dollar is no longer linked to gold, so critics say Section 122 is obsolete.
Awkwardly for Trump, his own Justice Department argued in a court filing last year that the president needed to invoke the emergency powers act because Section 122 did “not have any obvious application" in fighting trade deficits, which it called “conceptually distinct" from balance-of-payment issues.
Still, some legal analysts say the Trump administration has a stronger case this time.
“The legal reality is that courts will likely provide President Trump substantially more deference regarding Section 122 than they did to his previous tariffs under IEEPA," Peter Harrell, visiting scholar at Georgetown University's Institute of International Economic Law, wrote in a commentary Wednesday.
The specialised Court of International Trade in New York, which will hear the states' lawsuit, wrote last year in its own decision striking down the emergency-powers tariffs that Trump didn't need them because Section 122 was available to combat trade deficits.
Companies that paid tariffs under that act scored a court victory Wednesday when a judge ruled that refunds are due.
Trump does have other legal authorities he can use to impose tariffs, and some have already survived court tests. Duties that Trump imposed on Chinese imports during his first term under Section 301 of the same 1974 trade act are still in place.
Also joining the lawsuit are the attorneys general of Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, Wisconsin, and the governors of Kentucky and Pennsylvania.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Mangaluru police flag fake ‘sea breeze marathon’ Instagram campaign, urge public caution
Mangaluru: Police have flagged a fake marathon campaign being widely circulated on Instagram under the name “Sea Breeze Marathon” and warned the public against falling prey to a suspected cyber fraud network.
The purported post, which began circulating on April 3, claims to offer prize money of Rs 2.51 lakh for a 5 km race, Rs 3.5 lakh for a 10 km race, and Rs 5 lakh for a 21 km race. It also urges participants to register in advance. However, officials have clarified that no such marathon has been organised in Mangaluru.
The poster also promises to provide participants with free sports shoes, goodies bags and refreshments, in order to lure people.
Police suspect that the poster is part of a cyber fraud attempt designed to lure users into registering through fraudulent links.
Commissioner Sudheer Kumar Reddy cautioned that registering through such links could lead to mobile phone hacking and financial loss.
The campaign is also being amplified through a viral video featuring songs from popular movies, along with visuals of people participating in marathons, allegedly sourced from existing footage, giving the content a sense of authenticity and misleading people.
When Vartha Bharati conducted a reverse image search, the video was traced back to marathons held in Mumbai, further confirming that the circulating content is not related to any event in Mangaluru.
Speaking to Vartha Bharati, Commissioner Reddy confirmed that the campaign is fake and that no organisation has approached authorities seeking permission for conducting a marathon, including traffic or road clearances.
“So far, no complaint has been lodged, and no victim of the campaign has been reported,” he said.
