United States Supreme Court Throws Out Challenge Against Trump-Era Steel Tariffs
Jose Nino
|
Towards the end of October, the United States Supreme Court threw out a challenge from a manufacturer on steel tariffs that were imposed by former President Donald Trump and have been maintained by President Joe Biden.
The justices refused to hear PrimeSource Building Products’ appeal of a lower court’s decision to uphold a 25% tariff on imports of steel derivatives.
The court did not offer any explanation for its decision.
Back in 2018, former President Donald Trump signed orders slapping tariffs on imported steel and aluminum, alluding to the results of an investigation conducted under the Trade Expansion Act. Officials argued that the imports “threaten to impair national security” and had suggested that the Trump administration take action.
The tariffs were modified in 2020 to include several other steel derivatives, like nails.
PrimeSource, which is a nail importer based in Texas, argued that the original orders were in compliance with the law owing to how they came after officials discovered a national security threat. However, the expansion broke the law because they came several later without a new discovery of a national security threat.
“Two years later, without undertaking any of the statutory procedures, the president imposed tariffs on an assortment of steel derivatives as well,” PrimeSource said to the Supreme Court.
According to the law, the president must determine within 90 days of the Secretary of Commerce sending them a report whether he agrees with the suggestions and has an additional 15 days beyond that to enact the tariffs.
Then-Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross discovered in a 2018 report that “domestic steel production is important for national security applications” and that steel imports were projected to account for over 30% of domestic consumption. On top of that, he deemed that “excessive quantities of imports has the effect of weakening the internal economy of the United States, threatening to impair national security.”
The US Court of International Trade, based in New York, overturned the steel derivatives tariffs in 2021, declaring that the Trump administration did not meet statutory deadlines to place the tariffs.
The expansion “does not comply with the limitation on the President’s authority imposed by the 105-day time limitation” of the law, US trade Judge Timothy Stanceu declared in the ruling.
However, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed that decision in February, alluding to its own 2022 ruling that presidents have the power to impose “contingency-dependent” tariff hikes to reach their original national security objectives, if those objectives stay valid.
President Trump set up the 2020 tariffs to “close a loophole exploited by steel-derivatives importers … to address a specific form of circumvention,” US Circuit Judge Richard Taranto wrote in the federal circuit’s decision.
The Biden regime defended the tariffs, informing the Supreme Court that a review was unnecessary owing to the appeals court decision not colliding with any decisions from a separate appeals court.
The court system has its flaws, but it got it right here. Economic nationalism is one of the antidotes to the globalist disease that has afflicted the US. That along with immigration restriction will do much to restore economic order in America. If America’s working class is to continue to remain robust, economic nationalism and immigration patriotism must continue to be the policy norm.
Share: