US Court of Appeal ruled Friday that most of Donald Trump’s duties are illegal, undermining the use of duties by the Republican president as a key tool for international economic policy.

Trump has made duties US foreign policy pillar During his second term, using them to exert political pressure and renegotiate trade agreements with countries exporting goods to the United States.

The duties have given the Trump government the advantage of gaining financial concessions from commercial partners, while increasing volatility in financial markets.

“The law enables the president to take on a number of actions in the event of a national emergency, but none of these actions explicitly include the power of duties, or tax power”the court said.

The decision of the Court of Appeal of the Federal Regional Court in Washington relates to the legality of what Trump calls “reciprocal” duties, which were imposed in the context of his trade war in April, as well as a separate set of duties imposed in February. The court ruling is not concerned with duties issued under another legal power, such as Trump’s duties in steel and aluminum imports, the agency clarified Reuters.

The case is expected to be examined in the US Supreme Court.

Trump imposed duties under the International Emergency Emergency Law. The International Law on Financial powers (IEEPA) gives the President the power to face ‘Unusual and extraordinary’ threats during national emergencies.

“It seems unlikely that Congress has intended, by introducing IEepa, to deviate from his previous practice and to give the President unlimited power to impose duties.”the decision said. “The law does not mention any duties (or any of their synonyms) nor does it have procedural guarantees containing clear limits on the President’s power to impose duties.”

The 1977 law had historically been used to impose sanctions on enemies or to freeze their assets. Trump, the first president to use IEEPA to impose duties, argues that the measures were justified in data from commercial imbalances, the reduction of US productive power and the cross -border drug flow.

The Ministry of Justice has argued that the law enables duties under emergency provisions authorizing a president to ‘Regulates’ imports or block them completely.

Trump declared a national emergency in April due to the fact that the US is importing more than it has been exporting, which has been happening for decades. At the same time, he argued that the persistent commercial deficit undermined the capacity and military readiness of the US. He argued that February’s duties for China, Canada and Mexico were justified because these countries did not make enough to stop the illegal distribution of fentanyl through the US border, a claim that countries have refused.

The Court of Appeal has ruled in two cases/lawsuits that challenge Trump’s tariff policies: the first of five small US companies and the second by 12 US states under the leadership of the Democrats.

The Constitution provides to the Congressnot to the President, the power to impose taxes and duties, and any assignment of this power must be explicit and limited, according to lawsuits.

The US International Trade Court, based in New York, also ruled against Trump’s tariff policies on May 28saying that the president exceeded his power when he imposed both packages of disputed duties. The three -member committee even included a judge appointed by Trump himself during his first term.