Interviewer: Last week, New York joined 11 other states to sue the Trump administration for what they describe as illegally imposing tax hikes on Americans through tariffs. So, what are the legal arguments behind their case, and how likely is it to succeed? We’ve got managing partner Paul Harding from Harding-Mazzotti here to talk about all this. Thanks for being here. So, what exactly are the states asking for regarding these tariffs?
Paul: Well, the states have gotten together, and they said that the tariffs are illegal, that you can’t do this, it violates the Constitution of the United States. That in order to impose a tariff, you have to go through Congress and get approval, and without that, they want the judge to say injunction, we’re gonna stop this, go through Congress.
Interviewer: Now, there’s something called the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, so what does that have to do with all of this?
Paul: Well, that’s exactly what the Trump administration said. We’re in this situation. It is an emergency. We have to act quickly. We’re in danger economically, so we’re gonna do the things like tariff or we’re gonna freeze assets. And so that’s the act that they’re operating under. They have to report to Congress, but they don’t need congressional approval.
Interviewer: Got it. But then, what are they claiming the emergency is?
Paul: Well, two or three or four things depending, but the main one is immigration, and the other one is fentanyl, drugs coming in from those countries. And so, they have to stop that, and in doing so, they say it’s an emergency, and therefore, they have that power to do many things, including a tariff.
Interviewer: Is there any precedent for something like this?
Paul: Well, I had to go back and look and look. It was 1971, something similar. President Nixon put a duty, 10% duty tax under a similar statute. And people fought it, said you can’t do that, courts came back and said you could, but I wouldn’t say it’s analogous, but yeah, something in our history where this happened.
Interviewer: Yeah. More than 50 years ago.
Paul: More than 50 years ago.
Interviewer: Wow. And so, how likely is the lawsuit to succeed? What do you think?
Paul: Well, these things, you know, who can handicap these exactly, but I suspect that it’s gonna linger around. They might get an injunction initially. And then the courts got to decide, are we in an emergency situation, is that doctrine appropriate or not? Don’t know. I don’t want to handicap this one, but I really think that the courts, the first court who looks at this lawsuit, is going to set really the precedent for what’s gonna happen here.
Interviewer: Yeah. Well, it’ll be interesting to see.
Paul: Absolutely.
Interviewer: All right, Paul. Thank you.
Paul: You’re welcome.
