Washington, D.C. — Karoline Leavitt, a press secretary in the Trump administration, criticized judges who halted the former president’s tariffs, prompting backlash from a former White House attorney who questioned her credibility.
During a briefing on Thursday, Leavitt condemned the actions of the judges at the Court of International Trade, who recently blocked Trump’s tariff orders. The rulings had been appealed by Trump’s legal team to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington, D.C. Leavitt asserted that judicial intervention undermines the president’s authority, stating, “The courts should have no role here.”
She expressed concern about a “dangerous trend” of unelected judges influencing presidential decisions, particularly regarding trade and diplomatic negotiations. “America cannot function if President Trump or any other president has their sensitive diplomatic or trade negotiations railroaded by activist judges,” Leavitt warned.
Ty Cobb, a former counsel for President Trump, criticized Leavitt’s statements during an appearance on CNN’s “OutFront” with Erin Burnett. He mocked her comments and referred to her with a derogatory nickname, suggesting that her views were not taken seriously. Cobb stated, “I don’t think creepy Karoline… speaks in a way that resonates with a serious audience.”
Cobb also addressed the broader implications of Trump’s authority on tariffs, pointing out that the statute cited by the administration has never been successfully applied in this context. He remarked on the likelihood of the courts upholding decisions limiting presidential power concerning tariffs.
Reports indicate that Trump is currently facing seven lawsuits related to his tariff policies, which play a central role in his trade strategy. Historically, the imposition of tariffs has required congressional approval, yet Trump has maintained that he can bypass this need by declaring a national emergency due to trade deficits. His decisions have led to significant global market volatility.
A recent ruling from the U.S. Court of International Trade found that Trump’s tariff actions exceeded the authority granted under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977. Following this, Trump’s legal team has a 14-day timeframe to submit additional evidence to support their case.
As the legal challenges mount and the debate around trade policy intensifies, the implications of these court decisions could reshape how presidential powers are perceived in U.S. trade matters.
This article was automatically written by Open AI and the people, facts, circumstances, and story may be inaccurate. Any article can be requested for removal, retraction, or correction by writing an email to contact@publiclawlibrary.org.