SCOTT SIMON, HOST:
A federal appeals court has ruled that many of President Trump's sweeping tariffs are illegal. But the judge has delayed implementation of the ruling until October, giving the Supreme Court time to rule. Joined now by NPR's Ron Elving. Ron, thanks for being with us.
RON ELVING, BYLINE: Good to be with you, Scott.
SIMON: Social media post - the president says it would be, quote, "a total disaster for the country" if the tariffs went away. What does this ruling and all the back-and-forth mean for those trade deals?
ELVING: You know, this tariffs story has been whiplash practically from the get-go. Trump has imposed tariffs and lifted them. He's set them at 25% for a given country and then doubled them, set them at 100% of the value of the goods and then pared that way back. He's looked very much, or this whole playing out has looked very much like an array of negotiating tactics in search of a strategy. And while billions have been collected, it's premature to say that's really money in the bank - at least not yet.
So the disposition here is going to depend on what a series of courts - ultimately the U.S. Supreme Court - should decide. Did Trump follow the law in his end run around Congress in setting these tariffs, or is he within his rights? That's been a crucial question all along, but Friday's ruling from the full Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit - it really raises the stakes. So it will go to the Supreme Court eventually. But in the meantime, it's back with a trade court that has been tough on Trump in the past. And at the same time, let's remember, it could be good news for consumers if it ultimately restrains these new Trump tariffs and allows U.S. retailers to return to their previous price structures.
SIMON: Also yesterday, a federal judge in Washington, D.C., held a hearing on Trump's attempts to fire a member of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors.
ELVING: So that's right. Jia Cobb, a four-year veteran of the federal bench here in D.C., heard arguments on the lawsuit filed by Lisa Cook, a member of the Federal Reserve Board whom Trump said he was firing this week. It is far from clear he has the legal right to remove a member of the board except, quote, "for cause," unquote. Now, Trump has cited as a cause a controversy that was stirred by one of his most recent appointees, who has accused Cook of violating a rule on holding multiple mortgages. There's been no finding of guilt in that matter. And in fact, no charges have been filed in that matter, so we will be following that case.
SIMON: Also late yesterday, Judge Cobb ruled against the president on the administration's fast-tracking of deportations.
ELVING: And that's right, too. And in this case, which involves hundreds of thousands of individuals, Judge Cobb said Trump had not met the legal tests to show a national emergency existed that would give him special powers. So that too is under review, and again, the Supreme Court will likely be the last stop. But the case and the ruling have the potential to upend another big element in Trump's agenda for his second term.
SIMON: President moved to cancel nearly $5 billion in funding for international aid this week - unilaterally. Isn't Congress supposed to have the power of the purse?
ELVING: Well, yes, that's what the textbooks say. But here again, as we heard Trump himself say on tape this week, he's the president, and that means he can do pretty much what he wants if he thinks the country is in danger. And Congress, at least so far, has shown no willingness to buck the president on any of these major policy matters, even when his moves seem to challenge or ignore the role of Congress itself. Now, with the midterms of 2026 just around the corner, right now is the season for members of Congress to worry about challengers, not just for their reelection but for their renomination by their own party. And that's where Trump's influence over the Republican voting base can mean life or death for a member of Congress.
SIMON: Which introduces the fact that there has been some Republican resistance. Senator Susan Collins of Maine, the top Senate appropriator, called this, quote, "a clear violation of the law." So could Congress vote to stop it?
ELVING: They could, legally speaking. But do they want to go to war with Trump and his voters, who are also their own voters? Collins called it a clear violation, and it's hard to argue that point. She's in a prime position to push back, but how will she do so? And will other Republicans in the Senate who talk a good game about the Constitution and shared powers, but then find their own reasons to stand with the party and stand with the president? The day when Republicans defy Trump may well come, but it has not come yet. So in that sense, Trump is right. He can do anything he wants, practically speaking, because the Republicans in the House and Senate have yet to show it's ready or they're ready or willing to stop him.
SIMON: NPR senior contributor Ron Elving, thanks so much.
ELVING: Thank you, Scott. Transcript provided by NPR, Copyright NPR.
NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by an NPR contractor. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.
