Latest news with #LearningResources
The Herald Scotland
2 hours ago
- Business
- The Herald Scotland
Trump toy tariffs: Supreme Court won't speed decision on challenge
More: Hasbro layoffs: Toymaker restructures due to tariff struggles and weak demand The company, which makes educational toys, won a court ruling on May 29 that Trump cannot unilaterally impose tariffs using the emergency legal authority he had cited for them. That ruling is currently on hold, leaving the tariffs in place for now. Learning Resources asked the Supreme Court to take the rare step of immediately hearing the case to decide the legality of the tariffs, effectively leapfrogging the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in Washington, where the case is pending. More: 'Two dolls instead of 30': Trump acknowledges prices will force consumers to cut back More: Second federal court blocks Trump tariffs, this time for Illinois toy importers Two district courts have ruled that Trump's tariffs are not justified under the law he cited for them, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. Both of those cases are on appeal. No court has yet backed the sweeping emergency tariff authority Trump has claimed.
Int'l Business Times
8 hours ago
- Business
- Int'l Business Times
Supreme Court Declines To Fast-Track Challenge To Trump-Era Tariffs
The US Supreme Court on Thursday declined to expedite a major legal challenge to former President Donald Trump's tariffs on Chinese imports, opting not to intervene early in a case that could reshape presidential authority over trade policy. Educational toy companies Learning Resources and hand2mind had petitioned the Court to bypass the standard appeals process, citing the "sweeping economic consequences" of the tariffs and their impact on businesses and consumers nationwide. The Court's rejection means the case will proceed under the usual timeline, with the federal government now having until mid-July to file its response, Reuters reported. The companies argue that the tariffs, imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), were unconstitutional. They contend that the Act does not authorize the president to unilaterally impose trade barriers without congressional oversight. A lower court ruled in their favor in May 2024, stating that Trump lacked the authority to use emergency powers to enact the tariffs. That decision, however, is currently on hold pending appeal. In urging the Court to take up the case directly, the companies stressed what they called "unremitting whiplash" and an "unprecedented economic burden" placed on U.S. businesses. They asked the justices to schedule oral arguments as early as September 2025. The Biden administration opposed the motion, arguing that expedited review was "unwarranted" and that a similar case making its way through the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit presented a more suitable vehicle for resolving the legal questions. Solicitor General D. John Sauer advised the Court to allow the appellate process to play out, suggesting a decision could be better timed for the October 2025 term. While the Court's procedural ruling does not address the underlying legality of the tariffs, it delays any definitive resolution. The justices could still choose to hear the case in the next term or later, depending on the outcome of related appeals.
New York Times
9 hours ago
- Business
- New York Times
Supreme Court Won't Fast-Track Tariffs Challenge
The Supreme Court said on Friday that it would not fast-track a petition from two toy manufacturers challenging a major piece of President Trump's tariffs program. The court's order was one sentence long and gave no reasons. The companies' request was unusual for several reasons. Petitions seeking review ordinarily come from the losing side, but the companies had won in front of a district court judge last month. They then sought to leapfrog the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, which would ordinarily rule before the justices considered whether to grant review. And they asked the justices to move quickly, asking that they schedule arguments in September or October. The companies — Learning Resources and hand2mind — said Mr. Trump's tariffs had given rise to a national emergency warranting extraordinarily quick judicial action. They asked the court to order the government to respond to their petition by Monday. '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,' the petition said, the companies' challenges 'cannot await the normal appellate process (even on an expedited timeline).' In response, D. John Sauer, the U.S. solicitor general, said the government would file its opposition to the petition on the usual schedule — by July 17 — and that the justices could rule on it over the summer. The manufacturers argued that the law Mr. Trump relied on, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, did not authorize tariffs. Until Mr. Trump acted, their companies' brief said, 'no president had ever invoked I.E.E.P.A. to impose a single tariff or duty on goods in the statute's nearly 50-year history.' In a separate and broader challenge, the Court of International Trade also ruled against the administration's tariffs program. A different appeals court, the Federal Circuit, is set to hear arguments in that case next month. Both lower court rulings have been paused, allowing Mr. Trump to press forward with his tariffs. Once the appeals courts have ruled, appeals to the Supreme Court are all but certain, and the justices are quite likely to take up one or both of them at that point. The toy companies sought to use an unusual procedure to bypass the D.C. Circuit, 'certiorari before judgment.' The procedure used to be rare, mostly reserved for national crises like Nixon's refusal to turn over tape recordings to a special prosecutor or Truman's seizure of the steel industry. Mr. Sauer, the solicitor general, told the justices that the toy companies' case did not require expedited treatment. 'Certiorari before judgment,' he wrote, quoting from the court's rules, 'is an exceptional procedure reserved for cases 'of such imperative public importance as to justify deviation from normal appellate practice and to require immediate determination in this court.''
Al Jazeera
10 hours ago
- Business
- Al Jazeera
US Supreme Court declines to speed up decision to take up fight over tariff
The court declined to fast-track the review of the dispute over Trump having legal power to impose broad tariffs. The United States Supreme Court has declined to speed up its consideration of whether to take up a challenge to President Donald Trump's sweeping tariffs even before lower courts have ruled in the dispute. The Supreme Court denied on Friday a request by a family-owned toy company, Learning Resources, that filed the legal challenge against Trump's tariffs to expedite the review of the dispute by the nation's top judicial body. The company, which makes educational toys, won a court ruling on May 29 that Trump cannot unilaterally impose tariffs using the emergency authority he had claimed. That ruling is currently on hold, leaving the tariffs in place for now. Learning Resources asked the Supreme Court to take the rare step of immediately hearing the case to decide the legality of the tariffs, effectively leapfrogging the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in Washington, where the case is pending. Two district courts have ruled that Trump's tariffs are not justified under the law he cited, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. Both of those cases are on appeal. No court has yet backed the sweeping emergency tariff authority Trump has claimed.
Al Arabiya
10 hours ago
- Business
- Al Arabiya
Supreme Court Rejects Toy Company's Push for a Quick Decision on Trump's Tariffs
The Supreme Court on Friday rejected an appeal from an Illinois toy company pushing for a quick decision on the legality of President Donald Trump's tariffs. Learning Resources Inc. had asked the justices to take up the case soon rather than let it continue to play out in lower courts. The company argues the tariffs and uncertainty are having a massive impact on businesses around the country and the issue needs swift attention from the nation's highest court. The justices didn't explain their reasoning in the brief order rebuffing the appeal, but the Supreme Court is typically reluctant to take up cases before lower courts have decided. The company argues that the Republican president illegally imposed tariffs under an emergency powers law, bypassing Congress. It won an early victory in a lower court, but the order is on hold as an appeals court considers a similar ruling putting a broader block on Trump's tariffs. The appeals court has allowed Trump to continue collecting tariffs under the emergency powers law ahead of arguments set for late July. The Trump administration has defended the tariffs by arguing that the emergency powers law gives the president the authority to regulate imports during national emergencies and that the country's longtime trade deficit qualifies as a national emergency.
