By Dan Christensen, FloridaBulldog.org
A group backed by billionaire industrialist Charles Koch and Leonard Leo, the man who helped secure the conservative supermajority on the U.S. Supreme Court, has sued President Trump in federal court in Florida on behalf of a stationery company, calling his worldwide imposition of tariffs unconstitutional.
The suit marks yet another fissure in the conservative coalition that returned Trump to the White House in January. It is further notable because its principal focus is on obtaining relief for tariffs imposed on communist China.
On Wednesday, Trump announced a 90-day pause on his “reciprocal” tariffs, except for China. Trump said tariffs on China would be increased to 125 percent from 104 percent after China retaliated with tariffs on U.S. imports. On Thursday, he said it would be 145 percent. Trump’s baseline 10 percent tariffs on all U.S. imports remains in place.
“At some point, hopefully in the near future, China will realize that the days of ripping off the U.S.A., and other Countries, is no longer sustainable or acceptable,” Trump said on social media.
China retaliated Friday, raising its tariffs on U.S. goods to 125 percent. On Friday night, U.S. Customs and Border Protection announced that electronics, including smartphones and computers, are exempted from Trump’s reciprocal tariffs, but not the 20% tariff on Chinese goods for the country’s role in the fentanyl trade. Apple, whose iPhones are mostly are made in China, is one of the biggest beneficiaries of the tariff exemption.
Meanwhile, the 28-page complaint brought by Emily Ley Paper Inc., which does business as Simplified, laid out its case against Trump’s actions.
“A tariff is a tax on Americans’ commerce with other countries,” says the complaint filed by lawyers with Arlington, VA-based New Civil Liberties Alliance (NCLA). “The Constitution assigns Congress the exclusive power to impose tariffs and regulate foreign commerce. Presidents can impose tariffs only when Congress grants permission, which it has done in carefully drawn statutes.
“These statutes typically authorize tariffs on industries or countries that meet specified criteria, and only under specified conditions, after following specified procedures. Such statutes require advance investigations, detailed factual findings and a close fit between the statutory authority and a tariff’s scope.”
A RIGHT-WING CIVIL RIGHTS GROUP
The NCLA is a right-wing outfit that describes itself as a “nonpartisan, nonprofit civil rights group.” Its focus is on challenging what it considers abuses of power by the “administrative state,” especially “unelected bureaucrats.”
The complaint, filed April 3 in the Pensacola division of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida, asks Judge T.K. Wetherell II to declare that the “Chinese Executive Orders are unlawful and unconstitutional. And because those orders are unlawful,’’ the complaint seeks to vacate Trump’s “modifications” to the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States.
Named as co-defendants are Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and Peter Flores, acting commissioner for U.S. Customs and Border Protection, who the complaint says have implemented Trump’s tariff policies. The complaint asks the court to block them from “enforcing the China Executive Orders.”
Emily Ley Paper/Simplified, based in Pensacola, sells a brand of planners and other organizational products “for busy women.” Emily Ley is also a successful author.
On her Substack page Thursday, Ley wrote about how in 2012 she hooked up on the internet with “Joe,” the owner of a Chinese factory that she worked with to produce the “Simplified Planners” she used to launch her business.
“Joe and I continued to work together for many more years, until our needs outgrew his factory’s capabilities,” Ley wrote. “Were it not for the vast capabilities of international trade, my company, Simplified, now employing nine women, serving hundreds of thousands of women all over the world – both on our website and in mass retail stores – would have never gotten its start.”
As explained in the complaint, Trump issued the China executive orders “as part of a set of Executive Orders imposing across-the-board tariffs on our three largest trading partners: China, Canada and Mexico. The President purported to order these tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977 [IEEPA], but that is a statute that authorizes presidents to order sanctions as a rapid response to international emergencies. It does not allow a president to impose tariffs on the American people.”
“President Trump declared an emergency relating to China because of illegal opioids entering the United States. But his China Executive Orders show no connection between the opioid problem and the tariff he ordered,” the lawsuit says, “In fact, President Trump’s own statements reveal the real reason for the China tariff, which is to reduce American trade deficits while raising federal revenue.”
TRUMP WILL TRUMP CONGRESS IF HE WINS
Trump used IEEPA to “bypass” the law’s constraints, the complaint says, and Congress did not intend “to grant presidents a blank check to write domestic economic policy.”
“If the President is permitted to use the IEEPA to bypass the statutory scheme for tariffs, the President will have nearly unlimited authority to commandeer Congress’s power over tariffs. He would be empowered to declare a national emergency based on some long-running national problem, then impose tariffs purportedly in the name of that emergency – thus sidestepping the detailed constraints Congress has placed on the tariff authority it has granted.”
Trump’s heavy tariffs on products from China “has inflicted economic and competitive harm on Plaintiff Simplified, a small business that purchases products from sources in China and pays the related tariffs,” the complaint says. Significantly higher tariffs means competitive disadvantage, lost profits and “hundreds of thousands of dollars” in increased costs on Simplified. “If it moves its manufacturing operations away from China, this would impose further costs. Either course would require Simplified to raise its prices to its customers and either reduce its already small staff or not hire more staff.”
Because the New Civil Liberties Alliance lawyers on the case are not admitted to practice in Florida, they worked with Jacksonville’s Bryan Gowdy to file the case. Typically, out-of-state lawyers soon seek special permission from the court to represent their client in the case.
The NCLA has received millions of dollars from The Charles Koch Foundation, main supporters of Trump’s first presidency, and other conservative groups that include Donors Trust.
In a detailed report in 2013, Mother Jones, which like Florida Bulldog is a member of the Institute for Nonprofit News, called Donors Trust the “dark money ATM of the conservative movement.” In November 2023, Politico reported that Donors Trust has been heavily funded by The 85 Fund, which it described as “a pillar” of Leonard Leo’s “aligned nonprofit network.”
Leo is co-chair of the Federalist Society, a conservative and libertarian organization that seeks the “reordering (of) priorities within the legal system to place a premium on individual liberty, traditional values, and the rule of law.” Leo is responsible for suggesting Supreme Court nominees to Trump.
The lawsuit, apparently the first court challenge to Trump’s tariff scheme, comes as rifts in the administration have broken open. On Tuesday, Elon Musk, Trump’s billionaire government hatchet man, called Trump’s trade advisor, Peter Navarro, “a moron” following news reports that Navarro made up a fictional expert, Ron Vara (an anagram of Navarro’s name) to support his tariff views in books and memos.
Leave a Reply