Oregon Attorney General Ellen Rayfield and 11 other attorneys general secured a significant victory against the Trump administration’s tariff policies in a recent unanimous court decision. The U.S. Court of International Trade ruled against a substantial portion of Trump’s tariffs, marking a notable setback for the former president’s trade policies.

According to Politico, the ruling’s unanimity has become a major talking point among the attorneys general, with particular attention being paid to the composition of the judicial panel. Two of the three judges were Republican appointees, lending a bipartisan character to the decision that challenges Trump’s emergency tariff powers.

“I don’t know if exit strategy is in the Trump vocabulary,” Rayfield remarked when discussing potential next steps for the Trump administration, suggesting that the former president’s team might continue pursuing their tariff strategy through alternative means, such as Article 19 trade rules.

Why the court rejected the Trump administration’s argument about emergency powers

The court’s decision largely centered on the Trump administration’s claim that its emergency orders and International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) actions were beyond judicial review. This argument was firmly rejected by the court, which emphasized that Congress never intended to grant such unrestricted authority.

Rayfield explained that the administration’s position would essentially make any presidential emergency declaration unreviewable, using a hypothetical scenario about hockey players and maple syrup tariffs to illustrate the potential for abuse. She argued that such unlimited power would upset the constitutional balance of the separation of powers.

The ruling represents more than just a decision on tariffs; it reinforces the principle of checks and balances between branches of government. Rayfield pointed out that these democratic principles are designed to check both Democratic and Republican presidents, warning that unchecked emergency powers could be misused by any administration.

The case will now move to the federal circuit in Washington, D.C., where the Trump administration is expected to continue its appeal. Unlike many recent cases involving preliminary injunctions, this ruling was a summary judgment on the merits, which Rayfield believes will strengthen their position in the appellate court.

The decision has already had economic implications, with markets rallying following the announcement. The response to the ruling has been widespread, with Rayfield receiving numerous congratulatory messages from friends, family, small businesses, and elected officials, including Oregon Governor Tina Kotek.