Last week, we got a bit of a roller coaster ride in the courts regarding tariffs instituted by the Trump administration. First, there was the ruling by the Court of International Trade (CIT) striking down two different tariff programs implemented by the administration. Right on the CIT’s heels, U.S. District Court Judge Rudolph Contreras issued his own order striking down tariffs implemented under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) after first finding that he had jurisdiction and was not required to transfer the matter to the CIT. Then the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals issued a stay on the CIT’s ruling in the first case.
Advertisement
READ MORE: New: Another Judge Rules Against Trump’s Tariffs
Not So Fast: Federal Circuit Halts Trade Court Ruling on Trump Tariffs
But now, a Biden-appointed judge in the Northern District of California has dismissed a suit brought by the State of California. Judge Jacquelyn Scott Corley issued her order on the matter Tuesday morning.
Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley – a nominee of former President Joe Biden – issued a partial setback to California Gov. Gavin Newsom and Attorney General Rob Bonta, who sued Trump and several federal agencies in April.
The Trump administration had asked the judge to transfer the case from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California to the U.S. Court of International Trade, based in New York. She instead threw out Newsom and Bonta’s case altogether, opening a path for the two Democrats to appeal the ruling to the famously liberal U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.
The California Democrats argued Trump’s tariffs issued under the International Economic Emergency Powers Act violate the separation of powers doctrine because they were not approved by Congress, but the Trump administration says the levies address a national emergency due to the trade deficit with other countries.
Advertisement
Here’s a key excerpt from Scott Corley’s ruling:
Having carefully considered the parties’ submissions, and with the benefit of oral argument on May 22, 2025, the Court concludes this action falls within the CIT’s exclusive jurisdiction. Because this lawsuit arises out of executive orders imposing tariffs, and because those executive orders are “provisions of law for all purposes,” 19 U.S.C. § 3004(c), this action arises out of laws providing for tariffs and this Court is divested of jurisdiction. Because California requests dismissal rather than transfer to the CIT, transfer is not in the interest of justice. So, the Court DENIES the motion to transfer and DISMISSES the case without prejudice
Now, there are two ways to look at this: The judge denied the Trump administration’s motion to transfer the case to CIT, but she did so by finding that she did not have jurisdiction in the first place. That’s essentially a win for the administration.
The other part of that, though, is that by dismissing the case, she enables the State of California to immediately appeal her ruling to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals — something which California Attorney General Rob Bonta is spinning as a win:
Bonta issued a statement Monday celebrating how Scott Corley granted California’s request for dismissal to allow him and Newsom to seek an appellate review. The attorney general said the San Francisco-based federal judge’s decision “keeps the case in California and allows California to appeal to the Ninth Circuit, which it plans to do immediately.”
Advertisement
The state has already filed its Notice of Appeal in the matter, so this likely isn’t the end of the road for this particular litigation. RedState will, of course, continue to follow the case and provide updates as warranted.
Editor’s Note: Partisan federal judges are hijacking President Trump’s agenda and insulting the will of the people
Help us expose out-of-control judges dead set on halting President Trump’s mandate for change. Join RedState VIP and use promo code FIGHT to get 60% off your membership.
This post was originally published on here
