US Courts Block Trump’s Tariffs on Mexico
On the previous Wednesday, a stark judicial irony was exposed: The U.S. International Trade Commission unanimously blocked Donald Trump’s new tariffs against Mexico. They did so by invoking the Constitution, separation of powers, and legal limits on the president. Simultaneously, the Mexican government is moving in the opposite direction: it’s pushing a reform that politicizes the judiciary under the guise of a “democratic” election.
US Judges vs. Trump’s Tariffs
Judges Gary Katzmann, Timothy Reif, and Jane Restani—nominated by Barack Obama, Donald Trump, and Ronald Reagan, respectively—invalidated the tariffs imposed by Trump under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). They deemed that there was no “unusual and extraordinary” threat to justify such measures. The judges stated that trade deficits and fentanyl trafficking do not activate this legal tool. The ruling annulled, effective in 10 days, a 25% tariff on Mexican products outside the USMCA and a 10% tariff on energy and potash, though the White House has already appealed.
The court went further: it reminded that foreign trade is the Congress’s responsibility, not the president’s. Citing key precedents—such as Youngstown v. Sawyer and Marbury v. Madison—the judges affirmed that no president can assume powers without clear legal support. Thus, the judges defended constitutional order and prevented an arbitrary measure from increasing prices, disrupting supply chains, and triggering inflation.
Mexico Weakens Its Judiciary
While this unfolds in the U.S., Mexico’s already fragile judicial independence is further eroded by the upcoming reform allowing popular election of judges. Instead of empowering the people, it legalizes political control over the judiciary. What was once covertly done will now be legitimized through voting: subordination to the executive will no longer be shameful but institutionalized. It’s not democratization; it’s the colonization of law.
The new model does not strengthen justice; it turns it into an instrument of obedience and electoral calculation. Trump still has options: appeal to the Federal Circuit, take the case to the Supreme Court, or use other laws to justify tariffs under national security or unfair trade arguments. He could also apply financial measures or renegotiate trade agreements, but none of these paths will be quick or easy, and all face legal and political obstacles.
Irony of US Courts Protecting Mexico
The irony lies in the fact that, in this episode, Mexico was saved by the courts of another country. Judges who apply the law, not obey it; judges who halt the president, not support him; judges who honor the Constitution, not rewrite it on demand. A justice that, ironically, functions to protect a country where its integrity is being undermined.
Key Questions and Answers
- What happened with Trump’s tariffs against Mexico? The U.S. International Trade Commission unanimously blocked the tariffs, stating there was no “unusual and extraordinary” threat to justify them.
- How are US courts protecting Mexico? By upholding the Constitution and legal limits on executive power, US courts are indirectly safeguarding Mexico from potential economic harm caused by Trump’s tariffs.
- What is happening to Mexico’s judiciary? The Mexican government is weakening its judicial independence through a reform that allows popular election of judges, effectively politicizing the judiciary.
- What are Trump’s options regarding the tariffs? Trump can appeal to the Federal Circuit, take the case to the Supreme Court, or use other laws to justify tariffs. He could also apply financial measures or renegotiate trade agreements, though these paths face legal and political obstacles.
