Would a Foreign Court Rule Against Its Own Country?

The anti-Trump crowd are having a field day, overcome with glee as the little-known US Trade Court in Manhattan, struck down President Trump's “Liberation Day” tariffs.

Of course, most of these same celebrants would be disappointed and cry if Trump wiped out cancer. Because it was Trump.

But since the start of these tariffs, while the markets were early on in a bit of a tailspin, they seemed to right their ships and  they were set when the tariffs began.

AND, the tariffs had the effect that was intended.

Countries began negotiating a more fair playing field with the United States.

The ruling is certainly short-sighted and the effect could void the deals already made with the UK, the EU, Canada, and the biggest foreign actor of all, China. That would be a disaster to the US.

As a result, the case now heads to the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, and potentially the Supreme Court.

Today, the futures are up in response, the experts claim. But they easily could have been up, based on the recent trends anyway.

The court’s ruling covers a wide range of tariffs, including levies on fentanyl-related goods from Canada, Mexico and China, as well as reciprocal tariffs that had impacted nearly every major US trading partner.

Of course, right out of the box, China praised the ruling and urged the US to permanently abandon the tariffs.

“We call on the United States to correct its mistake and lift all unilateral tariffs,” a Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson said.

Which begs the question, which can be applied to many Court rulings:

Which country do our courts work for? Apparently, NOT the United States.