All articles tagged with #emergency powers
A D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the Trump administration cannot invoke a 202(c) emergency under the Federal Power Act to keep the J.H. Campbell coal plant open, finding the claimed emergency vague and not the kind Congress intended, and warning the order disrupts normal grid assessment and market signals while costing taxpayers hundreds of millions without averting a real shortfall.
A federal appeals court in the D.C. Circuit rejected Energy Secretary Chris Wright’s emergency order to keep Michigan’s Campbell coal plant online past its retirement, saying DOE overstepped by intervening in state reliability planning; the ruling favors Michigan, Illinois, and environmental groups and could influence similar challenges to other emergency orders affecting six coal plants; DOE may appeal.
The State Department approved $8.6 billion in arms sales to Israel, Kuwait, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates, fast-tracked under an emergency designation that bypasses Congress. The package includes APKWS munitions for Israel and Gulf partners, Kuwait’s upgraded battle command systems, and Qatar’s APKWS plus Patriot restocks, reflecting heightened defense needs as regional stockpiles run low amid the Israel–Iran conflict. The move follows earlier arms deals and underscores ongoing concerns about U.S. inventories and readiness for future conflicts.
With oil and gas prices rising amid the Iran–Israel war, several EU countries urge Brussels to deploy EU-wide emergency tools—such as price caps, subsidies, demand coordination and windfall taxes—while the European Commission emphasizes long-term plans to diversify supply and reduce demand. Italy, Austria, Slovenia and Slovakia are rallying for concrete, coordinated measures ahead of upcoming EU summits, a push that risks clashing with members who prefer market-led solutions and caution on emergency powers.
A circulated draft executive order proposes declaring a national emergency to let the president assume control over U.S. elections. Legal experts say such powers would be unconstitutional; the White House denies involvement, and the draft is riddled with errors and dubious citations.
A Florida lawyer's memo arguing the president could use the National Emergencies Act and the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to declare a national emergency and seize U.S. elections was ridiculed by legal experts, who say IEEPA targets foreign threats and economic actions, not elections run by the states. The plan would not authorize seizing voting machines or mail ballots, conflicts with the Elections Clause, and rests on flawed readings of Youngstown, making it legally flawed and unconstitutional.
The Supreme Court is examining whether President Trump exceeded his authority by using emergency powers to impose global tariffs, with questions from justices indicating potential skepticism about the administration's legal basis, and a possible quick decision expected.
The Supreme Court is scrutinizing President Trump's use of emergency powers under the IEEPA law to impose broad tariffs, with justices questioning whether the president has overstepped constitutional boundaries by bypassing Congress, raising doubts about the legality and future of such executive actions.
The Supreme Court is examining whether Trump's tariffs, justified by emergency powers law, are constitutional, with legal principles from previous cases under the major questions doctrine influencing the arguments, raising questions about presidential authority in foreign policy and national security.
The Supreme Court is set to decide on the legality of President Trump's tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, a case with significant implications for executive power, trade policy, and congressional authority, potentially reshaping how emergency powers are used in governance.
Businesses are urging the Supreme Court to invalidate Donald Trump's emergency tariff authority, challenging the legality of his use of emergency powers to impose tariffs.
The Supreme Court is fast-tracking a case to determine if President Trump can use emergency powers to impose tariffs globally, with a decision potentially impacting presidential authority and international trade policies. The case involves legal questions about the authority granted by the International Emergency Economic Powers Act and includes multiple challenges from different groups, with oral arguments scheduled for early November.
The Supreme Court will decide whether President Trump had the authority to impose broad tariffs under the emergency powers law, amid legal challenges arguing that his actions exceeded legal limits, marking a significant test of his economic policies and presidential powers.
The Trump administration has appealed to the Supreme Court to uphold the legality of its tariffs, arguing that the president has the authority to impose import taxes under federal law, after an appeals court ruled most tariffs illegal. The case highlights ongoing debates over presidential power, trade policy, and the impact of tariffs on businesses and international relations.
Mayor Muriel Bowser of Washington, D.C., pushes back against federal overreach by issuing an executive order to exit an unprecedented federal emergency, clarifying it does not extend Trump's emergency powers and emphasizing the city's autonomy, despite praise from Trump for her cooperation.