The Wall Street Journal editorial board has sharply criticized President Donald Trump’s recent tariff actions, arguing that the law does not give him the authority to impose such sweeping tariffs.
In a recent op-ed, the board warned that the tariffs could lead to higher consumer prices and called for a lawsuit to challenge Trump’s decision.
“The President invokes a law that doesn’t give him power to impose sweeping tariffs,” the board wrote. “Someone should sue.”
This criticism follows Trump’s move to impose a 25% tariff on imports from Canada and Mexico and a 10% tariff on goods from China. While these tariffs took effect earlier this week, the president has since made some exceptions.
The 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) allows the president to regulate imports and exports during a national emergency. However, the Wall Street Journal editorial board argued that Trump is misapplying this law.
“He’s treating the North American economy as a personal plaything, as markets gyrate with each presidential whim,” the board wrote. “It’s doubtful Mr. Trump even has the power to impose these tariffs, and we hope his actions face a legal challenge.”
The editorial pointed out that Trump’s use of the IEEPA represents a significant departure from how the law was originally intended to be used. It referenced the Supreme Court’s 2022 ruling in West Virginia v. EPA, which stated that Congress must specifically authorize major actions taken by the executive branch. The Journal suggested that this ruling makes it clear that Trump’s tariff actions lack the legal backing they need.
“Congress must expressly authorize economically and politically significant executive actions, which Mr. Trump’s tariffs undeniably are,” the board wrote.
They also questioned whether the fentanyl crisis, which Trump used to justify the tariffs, truly qualifies as an “unusual and extraordinary threat.” “Drugs have been pouring across the borders for decades,” the board pointed out. “The bigger problem is that IEEPA doesn’t clearly authorize tariffs.”
The editorial board also referenced past legal decisions to highlight the limits on presidential power in matters of trade. They discussed a case involving former President Nixon, who imposed a 10% tariff to address the U.S. trade deficit. However, Congress later placed restrictions on the president’s authority to apply such tariffs.
“Mr. Trump’s tariff doesn’t appear reasonably related to the fentanyl emergency,” the Journal’s editorial board wrote. “And Congress seemed to dislike Nixon’s use of emergency powers to deal with trade issues since three years later it gave the President limited authority to impose tariffs.”
The board concluded by pointing out that Trump may be deliberately avoiding the limited authorities given to presidents in order to have unchecked power to impose tariffs.
The Wall Street Journal’s editorial board’s criticism follows another editorial earlier this week, in which they called Trump’s tariff actions the “dumbest tariff plunge.”
