The US president’s tactic could put this fall’s elections at risk. A supreme court decision could go far to protect them
H
ating legal constraints, Donald Trump has repeatedly taken unilateral actions for which he had zero legal authority unless he found some national emergency to declare. So Trump, no stickler for the truth, has conveniently invoked numerous national emergencies to justify his unilateral actions – whether imposing tariffs on dozens of countries or deporting immigrants without due process – even when there wasn’t anything close to a real emergency.
A recent example involves Trump’s anger at Spain. Early this month, Trump was so furious at Spain for not letting the US use its air bases to help his illegal war against Iran that he called for cutting off all trade with Spain. Trump said he would order a trade embargo, with his treasury secretary suggesting that he’d invoke a national emergency under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA).
“Spain has been terrible,” Trump said. “We’re going to cut off all trade with Spain.” While Trump may view Spain’s refusal to bend to his will as some emergency blow to his ego, does anyone other than Trump believe that Spain’s action constitutes an “unusual and extraordinary threat” to the US – the standard that must be met to impose trade sanctions under the IEEPA?
