Newsweek: Gavin Newsom mocks Donald Trump after tariff plan struck down

California Governor Gavin Newsom took a swipe at President Donald Trump on Friday after an appeals court struck down his sweeping plan on global tariffs.

Why It Matters

The decision undercut a central element of President Trump’s unilateral trade strategy and could potentially raise the prospect of refunds if the tariffs are ultimately struck down.

The ruling set up an anticipated legal fight that could reach the Supreme Court.

What To Know

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that Trump had exceeded his authority by invoking the International Emergency Economic Powers Act IEEPA to declare national emergencies and impose broad import taxes on most trading partners, the Associated Press reports.

The legal challenge centered on two sets of actions: reciprocal tariffs announced on April 2—including up to 50 percent on some goods and a 10 percent baseline on most imports—and earlier tariffs announced February 1 targeting selected imports from Canada, China and Mexico tied to drug and migration concerns.

Newsom’s press office reacted to the ruling on X on Friday, saying, “If it’s a day ending in y, it’s a day Trump is found violating the law!”

The rebuke comes amid weeks of back-and-forths from the pair as Newsom has taken aim at Republicans‘ redistricting efforts and Trump’s implementation of national guard troops in U.S. cities.

Taking to his social media platform Truth Social, reacting to the ruling, the president vowed to appeal to the Supreme Court, saying in part that: “ALL TARIFFS ARE STILL IN EFFECT! Today a Highly Partisan Appeals Court incorrectly said that our Tariffs should be removed, but they know the United States of America will win in the end. If these Tariffs ever went away, it would be a total disaster for the Country. It would make us financially weak, and we have to be strong. The U.S.A. will no longer tolerate enormous Trade Deficits and unfair Tariffs and Non Tariff Trade Barriers imposed by other Countries, friend or foe, that undermine our Manufacturers, Farmers, and everyone else.”

What People Are Saying

Republicans Against Trump reacting to the president’s vow to appeal to the Supreme Court on X: “Grandpa is mad”

Retired U.S. Air Force General Robert Spalding reacting to Trump’s post on X: “Thank god”

William and Mary Law School Professor Jonathan Adler on X reacting to the ruling: “Whoa”

Justin Wolfers, professor of economics and public policy at the University of Michigan, on X: “BOOM. The federal appeals court rules Trump’s tariffs illegal, because they are. There’s no national emergency, and so the power to tariff a country rests with Congress. Trump admin has lost at every stage of the process, but stay tuned for the Supremes to chime in.”

Wolfers in a follow-up post: “This won’t end all tariffs. This ruling applies to tariffs applied to entire countries (which is most of the tariff agenda). The industry-specific tariffs use a different legal authority, and will remain. The White House has other (more limited) tariff powers it’ll dust off.”

What Happens Next

The appeals court did not immediately block the tariffs, however, allotting the Trump Administration until October 14 to appeal the decision.

https://www.newsweek.com/gavin-newsom-mocks-donald-trump-tariff-plan-struck-down-2121980

Raw Story: ‘Resignations seem likely’: Economist predicts investigation of Trump’s $600 billion fail

President Donald Trump’s administration has published the terms of the trade deal with the European Union, but some of the promises Trump claimed were coming didn’t materialize after all, according to one economics expert.

University of Michigan economics and public policy professor Justin Wolfers wrote on X that after perusing the deal, he discovered Trump’s promise of $600 billion being sent to the U.S. from the E.U. isn’t on the list.

“The most important thing is what’s not there. Trump had boasted, ‘They gave me $600 billion, and that’s a gift.’ But guess what? They didn’t. He didn’t get a penny,” wrote Wolfers. “Bottom line: The final text of the EU-US trade deal delivers $5,000 less to the average American household than the handshake agreement Trump boasted of on August 5.”

“I expect there will be soul-searching, an investigation, and recriminations, as the White House explores how its negotiators fell $600 billion short of the deal the president thought he had struck. Resignations seem likely, and a re-think of the entire deal-making apparatus,” Wolfers added.

The deal mapped out on July 28 promised, “The EU will purchase $750 billion in U.S. energy and make new investments of $600 billion in the United States, all by 2028.”

It explained, “The EU will invest $600 billion in the United States over the course of President Trump’s term. This new investment is in addition to the over $100 billion EU companies already invest in the United States every year.”

It appeared again toward the end of the July 28 plan: “The deal bolsters America’s economy and manufacturing capabilities. The EU will purchase $750 billion in U.S. energy and make new investments of $600 billion in the United States, all by 2028.”

The Aug. 21 deal changes the language significantly, shifting from a commitment to phrases like “make new investments” and “invest,” and now saying things like they’re “expected to invest.”

“In this context, European companies are expected to invest an additional $600 billion across strategic sectors in the United States through 2028,” the document says, removing the firm commitment. “This investment reflects the European Union’s strong commitment to the transatlantic partnership and its recognition of the United States as the most secure and innovative destination for foreign investment,” the new deal says.

The deal can be read here.

https://www.rawstory.com/trump-eu-trade-deal-resignations

Newsweek: White House is “full of lunatics” says economist

A leading economist has said the White House is “full of lunatics” as debates over the legality of President Donald Trump‘s sweeping tariff plans have resulted in a federal court showdown.

On Thursday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit paused a previous ruling from the Court of International Trade (CIT) in Manhattan, which argued that Trump had overstepped his executive authority in imposing the majority of his tariffs.

Commenting on the muted market reaction to these two developments, Justin Wolfers, a professor of economics and public policy at the University of Michigan, said investors had already reconciled themselves to the fact that the current administration is “out of control.”