Legal AF Podcast Summary Episode: Federal Judges Make Major Ruling on Trump Tariffs
Release Date: June 11, 2025
Hosted by MeidasTouch Network

Introduction to the Tariff Dispute

In this episode of Legal AF, host Michael Popak delves into the recent significant legal developments surrounding former President Donald Trump's tariff policies. The discussion centers on a pivotal ruling by the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, which has profound implications for Trump's ongoing tariff strategies with multiple countries.

Michael Popak ([00:00]):
"Donald Trump knows he's losing his negotiation leverage with these hundreds of countries that he imposed these high tariffs on. So he's had to fold and cut any deal he can..."

Court Ruling Overview

Popak provides a comprehensive overview of the court's decision, highlighting the judicial reasoning and the legal principles involved. The ruling addressed the constitutionality of Trump's tariff implementations, specifically focusing on the delegation of powers granted to the executive branch.

Key Points:

• Court Composition: The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, including judges appointed by both Trump and Obama, unanimously ruled against Trump's tariff actions.
• Legal Basis: The court determined that Trump's tariffs violated the delegation clause of the U.S. Constitution, which restricts the extent to which Congress can delegate its authority to the executive branch.
• Outcome: As a result, the tariffs imposed on Mexico, Canada, and China were blocked, benefiting a coalition of small businesses adversely affected by these measures.

Michael Popak ([01:20]):
"...they ruled against Donald Trump and found that he had violated the delegation clause of the Constitution... They blocked his tariffs against Mexico, Canada, and China."

Trump’s Response and Appellate Actions

In response to the lower court's decision, Trump filed an appeal seeking a stay on the court's order. Popak analyzes the appellate court's stance on granting such a stay, emphasizing that traditional legal doctrines do not typically consider negotiation leverage as a factor.

Key Points:

• Stay Granted: Contrary to legal expectations, the appellate court en banc granted a 10-0 stay, allowing the tariffs to remain in effect temporarily.
• Reasoning: The court cited the immediate need to maintain economic policies during ongoing negotiations, though this reasoning deviates from standard legal criteria for stays.
• Next Steps: Oral arguments are scheduled for July 31st, with expedited briefing to address the complexities of the case.

Michael Popak ([02:30]):
"When you look at the factors that have to be present, this just doesn't meet those factors in terms of, other than the Trump administration pleading not to have their economic policy destroyed or their negotiation posture destroyed."

Implications for Negotiations and Legal Precedents

The hosts discuss the broader implications of the appellate court's decision, considering both the legal precedent it sets and its practical impact on international trade negotiations. The decision effectively reinstates Trump's tariffs, temporarily restoring his leverage in trade discussions.

Key Points:

• Negotiation Leverage: By maintaining the tariffs, Trump retains a bargaining chip in negotiations with affected countries.
• Legal Precedent: The ruling underscores the judiciary's role in limiting executive overreach, reinforcing the separation of powers.
• Economic Impact: Small businesses, previously shielded from tariffs, may experience fluctuating import/export costs as negotiations continue.

Michael Popak ([06:19]):
"Donald Trump now has the leverage that he wanted... It's always the leftist activist Marxist courts."

Future Developments and Conclusion

Looking ahead, the episode anticipates the upcoming oral arguments and potential outcomes that could further shape the landscape of U.S. trade policy. The hosts emphasize the importance of monitoring these legal battles as they unfold, given their significant impact on both the economy and the balance of power between branches of government.

Key Points:

• Oral Arguments: Scheduled for July 31st, these will be critical in determining the final stance on the tariffs.
• Legal Strategy: Both the Trump administration and the small business supporters are expected to present compelling arguments to the court.
• Ongoing Coverage: Legal AF will continue to provide live updates and in-depth analysis as the situation evolves.

Michael Popak ([07:45]):
"We'll continue to follow it right here on the Midas Touch network and on Legal AF."

Key Quotes

• Michael Popak ([00:00]):
  "Donald Trump knows he's losing his negotiation leverage with these hundreds of countries that he imposed these high tariffs on."

• Michael Popak ([02:30]):
  "When you look at the factors that have to be present, this just doesn't meet those factors..."

• Michael Popak ([06:19]):
  "Donald Trump now has the leverage that he wanted... It's always the leftist activist Marxist courts."

About the Hosts

• Michael Popak: National trial lawyer strategist with extensive experience in civil rights law.
• Karen Friedman Agnifilo: Former Chief Assistant District Attorney of the Manhattan District Attorney's Office.
• Ben Meiselas: Founder of MeidasTouch Network, a prominent civil rights lawyer.

Stay Connected

For more detailed analyses and updates on this case and other legal-political intersections, subscribe to Legal AF on Substack and follow the MeidasTouch Network across various platforms.

This summary captures the key discussions and insights from the episode, providing listeners with a comprehensive understanding of the legal battle over Trump's tariffs and its broader implications.