Federal Trade Court Judges Elevate Themselves to the Presidency (Again), Rule That Trump Doesn't Have the Power to Set Tariffs as Joe Biden and Barack Obama Did
Update: Injunction Stayed, Tariffs Back On (For Now)

On May 15th, Deb Heine wrote a story for American Greatness reporting that three judges had been "hand-picked" to hear the case on Trump's tariffs -- judges who were guaranteed to overrule the elected President.

Disinformation Expert Lizzy @StarChamberMaid

According to the well-placed source, rather than drawing the panel at random, Chief Judge Barnett "fixed" the outcome by selecting three judges whom he knew would "overrule the president" and render his tariffs "null and void."

That report:

Source: The Fix Is In to Torpedo Trump's Tariffs in New York Trade Court

By Debra Heine
May 15, 2025

The fix appears to be in for two court cases against President Donald Trump's tariffs, according to a very knowledgeable source.

Last month, five domestic businesses filed a lawsuit in a little known trade court in New York challenging Trump's tariffs, arguing they have to rely on imported goods that are not reasonably available to them in the U.S.

In his April 2 executive order imposing a set of reciprocal tariffs, Trump declared a national emergency, calling trade deficits a threat to the nation's national security and economy.

Trump's tariffs are central to his economic agenda and designed to reduce the trade deficits between the United States and other world powers.

A three-judge panel at the United States Court of International Trade in lower Manhattan heard arguments in the case Tuesday, and reportedly "appeared skeptical" of the president's arguments.

If the panel decides that Trump's emergency declaration was unlawful, it would effectively block the president's global tariffs and upend his economic agenda.

The chief judge of the United States Court of International Trade is Mark A Barnett, who joined the court in 2013 after a nomination from President Barack Obama. He became chief judge on April 6, 2021.

According to the well-placed source, rather than drawing the panel at random, Chief Judge Barnett "fixed" the outcome by selecting three judges whom he knew would "overrule the president" and render his tariffs "null and void."

The source told American Greatness he was given this information by "very reliable people" who are "very close to the court."

And what do you know -- the three hand-picked judges ruled exactly as The Regime wanted them to.

A federal court shot down most of President Trump's wide-reaching tariffs Wednesday, ruling the commander in chief exceeded his authority when he plowed ahead with one of his signature policies.

The three-judge panel at the Court of International Trade in Manhattan assailed Trump's actions against other countries across the globe as "contrary to law" -- despite the president claiming emergency powers under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act allowed him to impose the controversial duties.

The court stated that Congress is typically responsible for issuing tariffs, not the president alone -- and that Trump's rationale for the exception to the rule didn't meet the emergency act threshold to act unilaterally.

"The President's assertion of tariff-making authority in the instant case, unbounded as it is by any limitation in duration or scope, exceeds any tariff authority delegated to the President under IEEPA," the judges determined.

"The Worldwide and Retaliatory tariffs are thus ultra vires and contrary to law."

And you'll never guess -- another district court judge issued another injunction blocking five of Trump's executive orders on tariffs.

A federal judge in Washington, D.C., sided with a Chicago-area toy company on Thursday, blocking five executive orders signed by President Donald Trump that imposed tariffs on Chinese imports.

U.S. District Judge Rudolph Contreras determined the International Economic Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) does not authorize Trump to impose the tariffs in his executive orders.

Contreras granted a motion for a preliminary injunction, filed by the toy company, Learning Resources, Inc., which will be stayed for 14 days in case the administration decides to appeal the decision.

Glenn Reynolds writes that the courts are creating the necessary predicate for Trump to go ahead and do what he has to do -- echo President Andrew Jackson and declare "The courts have made their decision, now let them enforce it."

In other words: F*** you, how many divisions do you have under your command?

Federal judges are working overtime to defy President Trump.

How much thought have they given to what happens if he defies them in turn?

So far, Trump has been obeying the court orders coming from mostly leftist federal district judges, even when those orders are deeply questionable.

Law professor Jonathan Turley calls it "injunctivitis," while Harvard Law's Adrian Vermeule says that district courts' nationwide restraining orders "are basically an automatic judicial veto on all new policy."

"Whatever form of government that is, let's please not call it 'democracy,' " Vermeule notes.

A new standing order in Maryland automatically blocks the deportation of any illegal alien whenever their lawyer files a petition -- before a judge even reviews it.

District Judge Allison Burroughs in Massachusetts blocked Trump's funding ban on Harvard almost the moment papers were filed. "Did she even read it, or was the rubber stamp already loaded?" one observer asked.

Clearly, a significant portion of the federal judiciary is hostile to Trump's policies and is happy to thwart them in any way it can.

Fifth Circuit Judge James Ho last week denounced his colleagues for acting like short-order cooks for the left.

"We should admit that this is special treatment being afforded to certain favored litigants . . . and we should stop pretending that Lady Justice is blindfolded," Ho wrote.

It all raises a question: What if Trump simply ignores these rulings?

He wouldn't be the first president to do so.

I mentioned earlier this week that Trump needs to do a sit-down Oval Office explainer of a speech justifying his tariff policies. As I mentioned in the comments, Reagan used an Oval Office speech to sell the country on his ambitious, "crazy" plan to spur the American economy by deeply slashing tax rates. He got his tax cuts, despite having a Congress controlled by big Democrat majorities in both houses.

Trump must make a similar appeal -- especially if he is now eyeing the extraordinary, though justified, action of last resort of simply telling the courts to go f*** themselves.

You can do a lot with the public on your side.

Update: H/t to TheJamesMadison, a federal judge has just reinstated the tariffs.

A federal appeals court has temporarily reinstated President Donald Trump's sweeping "reciprocal" tariffs as it considers the administration's request to leave the tariffs in place while litigation over their legality continues.

The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued an order Thursday afternoon granting "an immediate administrative stay" of a ruling Wednesday by the U.S. Court of International Trade that found Trump could not use emergency powers in an almost 50-year-old statute to impose tariffs on imports from countries around the globe.

The decision temporarily reimposes Trump's sweeping 10 percent global tariffs and the paused "reciprocal" tariffs that Trump imposed on more than 60 trading partners and has used as a leverage point in trade negotiations. It also applies to his 25 percent duties on Canadian and Mexican products and a 20 percent tariff on Chinese products in response to a purported national emergency on drug trafficking.

So, to explain again: The injunction wasn't issued after a trial, but just after a pre-trial "emergency" hearing. The injunction is made before the facts are heard, based on who judges think will win (read: want to win).

The Appeals Court stayed that injunction, putting it on hold.

The ultimate resolution will have to wait for, get this, a court actually hearing the full facts of the case.

Update: Injunction Stayed, Tariffs Back On (For Now)&bodytext=On May 15th, Deb Heine wrote a story for American Greatness reporting that three judges had been "hand-picked" to hear the case on Trump's tariffs -- judges who were guaranteed to overrule the elected President. Disinformation Expert Lizzy @StarChamberMaid According...&topic=world_news"> posted by Ace at 04:30 PM

| Access Comments