I had the honor of hosting the Joe Piscopo show today, from 6-10 AM ET.
We had some terrific guests, including Hans von Spakovsky, manager of the Heritage Foundation’s Election Law Reform Initiative, who weighed in on today’s surprise decision by a three-judge panel on the U.S. Court of International Trade that banned most of President Trump’s tariffs. The panel unanimously ruled unlawful President Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariffs, which were issued using the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, with the White House arguing that large trade deficits pose a threat to the U.S.
Von Spakovsky says the judges got it wrong. Their decision included a judgement about whether or not trade surpluses constituted an “emergency”, while they should have focused on whether the White House used the Emergency Act in a proper, legal manner. After all, judges are not appointed to discern economic issues; they are meant to weigh the proper application of the law. In other words, he argues they should have objected to the procedure, not the substance, of Trump’s tariffs.
Missed todays show? Listen on the podcast ft. guest host @lizpeek with guests @RichLowry, @NMalliotakis, @StephenMoore, @Betsy_McCaughey, @HvonSpakovsky, @DrTurleyTalks & MORE!https://t.co/tIhrzpovlT
— The Joe Piscopo Show (@JoePiscopoShow) May 29, 2025
Some are blasting the judges, accusing them of partisanship and politicized judicial overreach; since the individuals were appointed by Trump, Reagan and Obama, that seems a stretch. Not that politicization of the judiciary is not an issue.
Since we spoke, an Obama-appointed district judge from DC has also ruled against the tariffs, saying the president “cannot claim unilateral authority to impose them by declaring emergencies over trade deficits and fentanyl,” as reported by The Hill.
The White House appealed both rulings before the ink was dry.
District judges throwing up roadblocks to stop Trump’s agenda on issues like deportations and tariffs have become commonplace. It seems like every day another judge steps in front of the Trump train. Von Spakovsky says relief may (or may not) be coming soon. The White House has appealed any number of cases to the Supreme Court, including Trump’s effort to end birthright citizenship.
On Trump’s first day in office, he issued a long-promised executive order ending the right of anyone born on U.S. soil to automatically become a U.S. citizen. Executive Order 14160, “Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship,” denies automatic citizenship to children “born in the United States if their mother was unlawfully present or on temporary lawful status and the father was not a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident.”
An injunction against implementation of this EO was issued by U.S. District Judge Joseph N. Laplante, and the White House appealed. Other courts have also issued injunctions; arguments concerning the case were presented to the Supreme Court on May 15. The court is expected to decide by the end of its current term – the end of June or early July; observers say the decision will be one of the most consequential of the year.
The constitutionality of birthright citizenship is on the docket, but so is the power of district court judges. The case asks whether lower court judges should be able to block executive branch orders that impact the entire nation, as in this case. Von Spakovsky, who listened to the arguments, says the court appeared divided, and he has no idea which way it will go. Liberals want the executive branch (and particularly this one) held in check, while the conservatives appeared to side with the White House.
The decision may impact myriad other stand-offs between the White House and the courts. Stay tuned.
Meanwhile, I love this quote from conservative Justice Samuel Alito, who seemed to question the ability of lower court to issue nationwide injunctions.
“Sometimes they’re wrong,” he said, noting that lower court judges are often “vulnerable to an occupational disease, which is the disease of thinking that I am right, and I can do whatever I want.”
Amen to that!
