The legal system is crazy.
> The Clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate through October 14, 2025, during which the parties may file a petition for a writ of certiorari in the Supreme Court. If, within that period, any party notifies the Clerk in writing that it has filed a petition for a writ of certiorari, the Clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate pending (1) the Supreme Court’s denial of certiorari or (2) a judgment of the Supreme Court if certiorari is granted. While the issuance of the mandate is withheld, the United States Court of International Trade shall take no further action in this case.
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cafc.23...
Edited to remove hyphens that copied in from the PDF source.
If SCOTUS does decide tariffs are illegal (which they are, objectively, irrefutably illegal for the POTUS to declare - Congress is explicitly the only branch with this power in the constitution), the US may owe hundreds of billions back to countless organizations and individuals.
But we live in a country without consistent law or a reason-based government, so SCOTUS may just declare that the executive has absolute authority instead.
If Trump were a software developer, he would commit directly to main
JadeNB•5mo ago
The first two paragraphs, which are all that show up for me:
> Most of President Donald Trump’s global tariffs were ruled illegal by a federal appeals court that found he exceeded his authority by imposing them through an emergency law, but the judges let the levies stay in place while the case proceeds.
> The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Friday upheld an earlier ruling by the Court of International Trade that Trump wrongfully invoked the law to hit nations across the globe with steep tariffs. But the appellate judges said the lower court should revisit its decision to block the tariffs for everyone, rather than just the parties in the case.
xyzzy_plugh•5mo ago