Toy companies ask Supreme Court to swiftly take up Trump's tariff challenge
Washington — A pair of Illinois-based companies that sell educational toys and products asked the Supreme Court on Tuesday to swiftly take up their challenge to President Trump's sweeping tariffs, arguing that the "massive impact" on businesses and consumers warrants its immediate intervention.
The companies, Learning Resources and hand2mind, urged the justices to decide whether a federal emergency powers law, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, gives the president the power to impose tariffs. They are asking the Supreme Court to take up their court fight before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit weighs in and expedite consideration of that request.
The companies have suggested that if the court does decide to take up their case, it should hear arguments on Mr. Trump's authority to impose the levies during either a special September sitting or in October, when the justices will convene for their next term.
"In light of the tariffs' massive impact on virtually every business and consumer across the nation, and the unremitting whiplash caused by the unfettered tariffing power the president claims, challenges to the IEEPA tariffs cannot await the normal appellate process (even on an expedited timeline)," lawyers for Learning Resources and hand2mind wrote in a filing.
The companies' lawsuit is separate from another challenge to Mr. Trump's tariffs that was filed with the U.S. Court of International Trade. In that case, brought by five U.S.-based companies and a group of 12 states, the trade court permanently blocked Mr. Trump's 10% tariff on virtually every U.S. trading partner, as well as his duties on imports from Mexico, Canada and China, which the president had imposed in response to what he said was the trafficking of drugs into the U.S.
The Justice Department asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit to review that decision. The Federal Circuit allowed Trump's tariffs to go back into effect while it considers the appeal and scheduled arguments for July 31.
The dispute now before the Supreme Court was brought in federal court in Washington, D.C. The companies argued that neither the Constitution nor IEEPA grants the president the authority to levy tariffs at all. The case specifically involves his 10% baseline tariff on most countries, as well as a 20% tariff on China that Mr. Trump said is in response to the flow of illicit drugs into the U.S.
U.S. District Judge Rudolph Contreras ruled in favor of the firms last month, finding that the emergency powers law "does not authorize the president to impose the tariffs set forth" in his executive orders. His decision, though, was more narrow, as it barred the Trump administration only from collecting any tariff from the two companies. Contreras paused his decision while the Justice Department appealed to the D.C. Circuit.
In their filing with the Supreme Court, the companies reiterated that IEEPA does not give the president unilateral power to set the sweeping tariffs. They said that the two courts that have ruled on the matter — the district court in Washington and the trade court — both declared Mr. Trump's levies unlawful on two different grounds.
But they noted that those injunctions have not been paused pending the appeals.
"Even as these punishing tariffs cause American businesses and consumers to bleed billions of dollars each month, there will be no relief any time soon," lawyers for the firms said.
Mr. Trump's tariffs are a centerpiece of his economic agenda, and he has argued that they are critical to bringing manufacturing jobs back to the U.S. The president has also used the tariffs, and the threat of higher rates, as leverage to force trading partners into negotiations.
Mr. Trump announced his 10% tariffs, as well as a set of now-paused "reciprocal" tariffs, in April on what the White House dubbed "Liberation Day." But soon after, the president halted the reciprocal duties on 57 countries amid rattled financial markets and concerns of an economic downturn.
Sneak peek: The Troubled Case Against Jane Dorotik
American stranded in Israel with her family speaks out amid airstrike exchanges with Iran
Appeals court hearing on California lawsuit against Trump's National Guard deployment to L.A.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Wall Street Journal
25 minutes ago
- Wall Street Journal
Trump Says He's Nearing a Possible Deal With Harvard
President Trump said his administration was 'working closely' with Harvard University and could announce a deal within the next week. The White House and Harvard have been locked in battle since late March. Trump has pulled billions in federal funds over antisemitism and DEI concerns, tried to block Harvard's ability to enroll international students and threatened its tax-exempt status. Harvard has sued the administration, saying the government has violated its First Amendment rights.
Axios
25 minutes ago
- Axios
Trump admin shortens ACA enrollment window
The Trump administration on Friday narrowed the period to sign up for Affordable Care Act coverage and imposed other restrictions aimed at rolling back Biden-era flexibilities for the program. Why it matters: The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services expects the new policies to lower marketplace premiums by about 5% on average, and save taxpayers $12 billion next year. But between 725,000 and 1.8 million people are expected to lose coverage, per CMS's projections. The big picture: Congress is considering codifying many of the same provisions in the massive GOP budget bill that's now in the Senate. That would make them much harder for a future administration to undo. State of play: CMS is shortening the period for enrolling in marketplace insurance by two weeks, starting for plan year 2027. Federal exchanges will then be open for sign-ups from Nov. 1 through Dec. 31 of each year. It's also repealing the monthly opportunity started under the Biden administration for lower-income people to get marketplace coverage. The new rule limits plans' ability to cover gender-affirming care beginning next year. It also excludes Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) recipients from obtaining ACA coverage. CMS said the policies will ensure federal subsidies to offset the cost of ACA coverage only support statutory goals of the law. Yes, but: In response to public comments, CMS is making several of its changes temporary. For plan year 2026 only, CMS will begin charging a $5 monthly premium for consumers who are automatically reenrolled in an ACA plan from one year to the next and would otherwise have fully subsidized coverage. Other changes concerning income verification for enrollees will also end after 2026. Between the lines: Insurance losses from the new policy will be felt hardest in states where "erroneous and improper enrollment is most noticeable," including Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas and Utah, CMS said.
Boston Globe
35 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
A potential strike on Iran tests Trump's propensity to play to both sides
Since his first campaign for president 10 years ago, Trump has excelled at appearing to favor both sides of the same issue, allowing supporters to hear what they want to hear, whether he's talking about tariffs, TikTok, abortion, tax cuts, or more. But the prospect that the United States might join Israel in bombing Iran is testing his ability to embrace dueling positions with little to no political cost. Some of Trump's most ardent supporters — those who defended him during multiple investigations and ultimately returned him to the White House — are ripping one another to shreds over the idea and at times lashing out at Trump as well. Advertisement The war in Iran is exactly the kind of Middle East entanglement that Trump's anti-interventionist base believed he was bitterly opposed to, because he repeatedly said he was. But he is also the same president who, in his first term, authorized missile strikes in Syria, after its leadership used chemical weapons on citizens, and the assassination of a top Iranian general, Qassem Soleimani — two actions he took pride in. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up To Trump, the contradictions are not actually contradictions. 'I think I'm the one that decides that,' he told The Atlantic recently in response to criticism from one of his most vocal anti-interventionist supporters, Tucker Carlson, who said the president's support for Israel's fight in Iran ran against his 'America First' message. Trump was propelled to victory in the Republican primary in 2016 as an outsider, in part because he forcefully condemned the invasion of Iraq, authorized by the last Republican president more than a decade before, and the seemingly endless war that followed. Yet he said the United States should have taken the country's oil, and ran radio ads saying he would 'bomb the hell' out of the Islamic State group. Advertisement He has said he wants to renew the tax cuts he put into effect in his first term, which saved some of the wealthiest earners millions, while also suggesting that congressional Republicans should implement a new tax on the wealthiest. He has said he supports businesses and also wants to deport the immigrant workforce that fuels parts of the economy. He wants to engage in mass deportation and also wants to sell visas for $5 million. He has celebrated the Supreme Court decision to overturn Roe v. Wade as a point of pride while also condemning Republican governors who signed bills banning most abortions after six weeks of pregnancy. He has both celebrated and criticized his own criminal justice reform bill of 2018. Despite the contradictions, Republicans for years have been united in support of Trump and what he says he wants, giving him a benefit of the doubt that few, if any, career politicians have ever received. Even when most elected Republicans held Trump at a distance after the deadly attack on the Capitol by a pro-Trump mob on Jan. 6, 2021, Trump still had a tight grip on Republican primary voters. Trump, a celebrity known to the electorate for decades, has obscured long-standing and unresolved foreign policy divisions within the party dating back to the aftermath of President George W. Bush's push to invade Iraq. Advertisement But as Trump decides whether to plunge the United States into the heart of the Israel-Iran conflict, his core supporters are splintering. Trump's announcement Thursday that he could take up to two weeks to decide did not sit well with some of his most hawkish supporters. On social media, Fox News host Mark Levin began a lengthy post by suggesting that the president was being pulled back from what he actually wants to do. 'LET TRUMP BE TRUMP!' Levin wrote. 'We got our answer. Iran says no unconditional surrender. Again. And again. And again. They cheat and lie and kill. They're TERRORISTS!' His anti-interventionist supporters, meanwhile, have been equally alarmed by what he might decide to do. 'Anyone slobbering for the U.S. to become fully involved in the Israel/Iran war is not America First/MAGA,' Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene, Republican of Georgia, posted on social media over the weekend. Trump's advisers say that on the Israel-Iran conflict in particular, the president is dealing with a fast-moving, complicated situation that does not lend itself to simple, black-and-white solutions, despite the fact that he has consistently campaigned that way. 'President Trump considers the nuances of every issue but ultimately takes decisive action to directly benefit American families,' said Anna Kelly, a White House spokesperson. 'The American people trust this president to make the right decisions,' she said, adding that he 'started the Make America Great Again movement because he represents a new leadership that puts Americans first.' But in 2025, Trump is not the only one who can command media attention. Carlson is no longer on Fox News, but he has a show that streams on the social platform X and is a leading voice among foreign policy 'restrainers' who have argued that Trump would be acting against his own movement should he strike Iran. Advertisement Steve Bannon, an adviser who was exiled from the White House in the first year of Trump's first term, has become one of the dominant voices among the MAGA faithful with his 'War Room' podcast, delivering the same message as Carlson. Yet Trump has found that many of his allies will ultimately come back to him, despite unhappiness with some of his decisions.
