Connect with us

Business

‘Trump’s trade deals are illegal,’ Piper Sandler warns, predicting a Supreme Court smackdown by June 2026

Published

on



President Donald Trump’s trade deals are illegal, Piper Sandler flatly declares in a new research note. The investment bank analyzed ongoing court battles and legislative authority, and concluded that Trump’s reliance on the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose wide-ranging tariffs and cut bilateral deals far exceeds the powers granted by Congress.

It’s not a new opinion from Piper, necessarily—the bank laid out its reasoning in April, shortly after Trump’s “Liberation Day” announcement of universal tariffs under the IEEPA. Then as now, it sees a 9-0 ruling in the Supreme Court against Trump as more likely than a Trump win.

The reason that the Piper Sandler team of Andy Laperriere, Don Schneider and Melissa Turner is revisiting the subject is that oral arguments in these and similar cases are scheduled through September. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit will hear oral arguments on whether Trump truly has unlimited authority under IEEPA to impose tariffs on Thursday, July 31. Piper Sandler forecasts that appellate courts will issue rulings over the next several months.

“Trump will probably continue to lose in the lower courts, and we believe the Supreme Court is highly unlikely to rule in his favor,” the bank said. Here’s why.

Stiff resistance

Trump’s trade policy has encountered stiff resistance as lower courts push back against the administration’s sweeping claims of executive authority. On May 28, the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT) ruled unanimously against Trump’s use of IEEPA for tariffs, calling the administration’s arguments unconvincing. The decision is now under appeal.

In a separate May 29 ruling, D.C. District Judge Rudolph Contreras found that IEEPA does not enable the president to impose tariffs at all and ordered an immediate reversal of certain duties—though that order is currently stayed pending appeal.

According to Piper Sandler, the heart of the matter is congressional intent. As it did in April, the firm argues that IEEPA, enacted in 1977, was designed to give the president certain emergency economic powers, but not blanket authority to set tariffs. Courts have consistently rejected the idea that the statute includes such sweeping power.

Even recent bilateral deals, such as Trump’s agreement with Japan, do not cure the underlying legal flaw. Congress, not the president, holds the ultimate authority to impose tariffs and approve international trade agreements. Piper Sandler stresses, “Making a deal with another country has no bearing on the legality of Trump’s tariffs,” highlighting that executive-led deals absent congressional approval lack legal standing. “If Trump does not have the authority to impose tariffs he is claiming, it doesn’t matter whether he makes a deal with Japan or anyone else.”

Billions and bilateral deals at stake

If the Supreme Court rules against Trump, all trade deals and announced tariff changes made under IEEPA—including minimum 10% import rates and threatened reciprocal tariffs—would be declared instantly illegal. Refunds could flow to companies and individuals who have paid unlawfully imposed tariffs, if they file claims with the CIT.

The massive, headline-grabbing $550 billion Japanese investment pledge is cited by Piper Sandler as an example of economic promises lacking clarity, specifics, or legal durability.

“Our trading partners and major multinationals know Trump’s tariffs are on shaky ground,” the Piper team writes. “It’s notable the promise of $550 billion in Japanese investments in the U.S. is accompanied by no details. It’s not clear where the money will be coming from, who will decide how it is allocated, and over what period the $550 billiln will be spent.”

Despite all these reasons the tariffs are clearly illegal, Piper insists that the tariffs are likely to go up from this point and “remain at record levels for the next many months.” Here’s why.

Will tariffs go away soon?

Piper Sandler’s analysts caution that tariffs are likely to remain in place in the near term, supported by administrative stays and the slow judicial process. Even if reciprocal tariffs are struck down, Trump could pivot to other statutes, such as Section 232 (covering steel, aluminum, and cars), though these have even stricter legal guardrails and could invite further litigation. Trump is on “strong legal ground” in using Section 232 to impose tariffs on steel, aluminum and cars, the bank says, but he may try to stretch that authority as he has done with other trade statutes. “The base case is there will be years of legal battles over tariffs.”

The research note details at least eight ongoing lawsuits from a diverse range of plaintiffs—including states, tribes, and small businesses—all challenging Trump’s use of IEEPA. Court dockets now stretch across several federal circuits, signaling that “years of legal battles” may follow, even if Trump loses at the Supreme Court.

Piper Sandler emphasizes that major multinational corporations and foreign governments see U.S. trade policy as unstable. The result, they argue, is reluctance to invest heavily in the U.S. until the legal landscape becomes clearer—a situation that may persist for months, if not years, irrespective of any immediate court ruling.

Piper Sandler’s analysts express confidence that recent judicial skepticism of the executive branch’s unchecked statutory interpretations will carry over to the Supreme Court. The bank finds the conservatives on the court likely to vote just as they did in a series of recent cases, in which they “lined uniformly against the Executive Branch pulling out an old statute and asserting far-reaching, never-before-used authority nowhere found in the text of the statute.” The liberals are also not likely to grant unlimited authority to Trump.

Still, with Trump’s well-known litigious nature, and the legal calendar ahead, Piper concludes: “Instability surrounding trade is likely to last a lot longer.”

For this story, Fortune used generative AI to help with an initial draft. An editor verified the accuracy of the information before publishing. 



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

JetBlue flight near Venezuela avoids midair collision with U.S. Air Force tanker

Published

on



A JetBlue flight from the small Caribbean nation of Curaçao halted its ascent to avoid colliding with a U.S. Air Force refueling tanker on Friday, and the pilot blamed the military plane for crossing his path.

“We almost had a midair collision up here,” the JetBlue pilot said, according to a recording of his conversation with air traffic control. “They passed directly in our flight path. … They don’t have their transponder turned on, it’s outrageous.”

The incident involved JetBlue Flight 1112 from Curaçao, which is just off the coast of Venezuela, en route to New York City’s JFK airport. It comes as the U.S. military has stepped up its drug interdiction activities in the Caribbean and is also seeking to increase pressure on Venezuela’s government.

“We just had traffic pass directly in front of us within 5 miles of us — maybe 2 or 3 miles — but it was an air-to air-refueler from the United States Air Force and he was at our altitude,” the pilot said. “We had to stop our climb.” The pilot said the Air Force plane then headed into Venezuelan air space.

Derek Dombrowski, a spokesman for JetBlue, said Sunday: “We have reported this incident to federal authorities and will participate in any investigation.” He added, “Our crewmembers are trained on proper procedures for various flight situations, and we appreciate our crew for promptly reporting this situation to our leadership team.”

The Pentagon referred The Associated Press to the Air Force for comment. The Air Force didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

The Federal Aviation Administration last month issued a warning to U.S. aircraft urging them to “exercise caution” when in Venezuelan airspace, “due to the worsening security situation and heightened military activity in or around Venezuela.”

According to the air traffic recording, the controller responded to the pilot, “It has been outrageous with the unidentified aircraft within our air.”

Join us at the Fortune Workplace Innovation Summit May 19–20, 2026, in Atlanta. The next era of workplace innovation is here—and the old playbook is being rewritten. At this exclusive, high-energy event, the world’s most innovative leaders will convene to explore how AI, humanity, and strategy converge to redefine, again, the future of work. Register now.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Trump admits he can’t tell if the GOP will keep the House despite massive investment pledges

Published

on



President Donald Trump admitted that he’s not sure if his economic policies will pay off for Republicans at the ballot box in 2026.

In an interview with the Wall Street Journal that was published late Saturday, he pointed to massive investment pledges that he’s secured since returning to the White House.

But when asked if Republicans will lose control of the House in next year’s midterm elections, Trump replied, “I can’t tell you. I don’t know when all of this money is going to kick in,” adding that forecasts say the second quarter.

Trump has previously touted as much as $21 trillion of investments pouring into the U.S., though recent commitments don’t come close to adding up to such levels.

Still, under trade deals Trump has negotiated, the European Union has vowed $600 billion in investment, Japan $550 billion, and South Korea $350 billion. Separately, Saudi Arabia has promised $1 trillion. Companies have also announced plans to invest hundreds of billions of dollars, though some of that includes money planned during the Biden administration.

While the timing of all the money is uncertain, not to mention how much will actually be spent, companies have expressed the need to diversify supply chains with more domestic production. Apple has said its $600 billion pledge to build U.S. factories will create a “domino effect” that ignites manufacturing across the country.

At the same time, Wall Street expects Trump’s tax cuts from his One Big Beautiful Bill Act to deliver a significant jolt of fiscal stimulus to the economy next year, potentially reaccelerating GDP growth.

That would come as voters made clear in last month’s off-year elections that affordability is their top priority. Inflation has cooled from its 2022 high, but prices are up sharply from pre-pandemic levels, and consumers are revolting over higher insurance, electricity and grocery bills. Even most Trump voters say the cost of living is bad.

Trump has dismissed the affordability issue as a Democratic “hoax” and insists prices are down. He told the Journal that he will lower prices.

“I think by the time we have to talk about the election, which is in another few months, I think our prices are in good shape,” Trump said.

“I’ve created the greatest economy in history. But it may take people a while to figure all these things out,” he added. “All this money that’s pouring into our country is building things right now—car plants, AI, lots of stuff. I cannot tell you how that’s going to equate to the voter, all I can do is do my job.”

Trump has floated some ideas to appease voters on affordability, including a 50-year mortgage to lower monthly payments and $2,000 “dividend” checks. He also continues to pressure the Federal Reserve to lower rates, even though it could worsen inflation, and rolled back tariffs on some food imports.

In his interview with the Journal, Trump didn’t say if he would cut tariffs on other goods. He also warned that if the Supreme Court strikes down his global tariffs, his alternatives are not as “nimble, not as quick.”

 “I can do other things, but it’s not as fast. It’s not as good for national security,” Trump added. 



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Nicotine pouches can be a better alternative to cigarettes says CEO

Published

on



Smoking is one of the clearest public-health failures of our time. More than 500,000 Americans still die each year from smoking-related illnesses, and globally the picture is even more alarming. In the United States, anti-smoking campaigns have reduced the number of new cigarette users, but the effectiveness of these measures may be fading. Indeed, the headline of a widely-shared news story notes “Celebrities Are Making Smoking Cigarettes Cool Again”. Yikes. Meanwhile, a quick trip to Mexico, Europe, or Asia is enough to see that cigarettes remain very much in style.

Reducing cigarette use, and preventing a new generation from getting hooked on nicotine, is a noble goal. That is one reason James Monsees and Adam Bowen founded the vape company JUUL Labs, as a potentially less harmful alternative for adult smokers. But a mix of regulatory missteps by a hostile FDA and market loopholes opened the door to a wave of counterfeit and bootleg vapes, often imported from China, sold in local stores, highly addictive, and completely unregulated. Many people became sick from using vapes with unknown ingredients. Teenagers were easily able to access bootleg vapes from China in youth-friendly flavors. What began as an idealistic goal—moving adult smokers off of cigarettes—turned into a new epidemic. 

Now we have two problems: cigarettes and vapes.

I believe science and technology can solve both. I was a tobacco user who became addicted to vaping. I tried everything to quit and cut down my nicotine use. Eventually, I discovered Swedish-style white pouches. That experience led me to create Sesh+, a premium, tobacco-free nicotine pouch made with transparent ingredients. It has been life-changing for me personally: I haven’t picked up a vape since switching to pouches. In Sweden, where oral nicotine products have been widely used for decades, smoking rates are among the lowest in Europe and smoking-related disease is correspondingly lower.

There is growing evidence that nicotine itself, while addictive, is not what primarily causes smoking-related disease; it’s the toxic byproducts of combustion that kill. With vaping, the concern is different: it’s the lack of transparency and quality standards that should alarm us. As a health-conscious consumer, I want to know exactly what I’m putting into my body. That’s why our pouches are independently lab-tested for contaminants like heavy metals and are manufactured in the United States under strict quality controls. 

Fake nicotine pouches are already in the U.S. market. Sofia Hamilton writes for Reason that her favorite convenience store unknowingly sells counterfeit nicotine pouches, and how only someone deeply familiar with FDA nicotine rules could tell the difference. No one should have to be a nicotine policy expert just to know whether a product is safe.

Important questions remain. We do not want to create a product that attracts people who don’t already use nicotine. The average Sesh+ customer is over 35, and I’m very proud of that. Early data is encouraging: a recent Rutgers study found that new nicotine users taking up pouches remains very low. Government has a responsibility to keep black-market and counterfeit pouches out of consumers’ hands. Industry must ensure retailers are educated and know what they’re selling. And we need strong youth prevention laws.

Nicotine pouches will only be effective if industry and government work together to ensure we are not attracting youth or non-nicotine users.

In the U.K., the proposed Tobacco and Vapes Bill would ban people born in or after 2009 from ever purchasing nicotine products. In the United States, we have already raised the legal age to buy tobacco to 21. These are the kinds of measures our industry should support. If the legislation in the U.K. passes, I hope other countries will adopt similar policies to prevent youth from accessing nicotine products. I also hope to see product-verification technology adopted as an industry standard so counterfeit nicotine products never reach consumers. Age verification is not enough; we must ensure a market for counterfeit and bootleg nicotine pouches does not emerge.

If companies in the nicotine pouch space work together, we can learn from JUUL’s experience and avoid repeating the same mistakes. Our responsibility is clear: help adult smokers move to potentially less harmful alternatives, without creating a new generation of nicotine users. If we get this right, a world free from tobacco is not just aspirational. It’s achievable.

Max Cunningham is the CEO of Sesh+, a nicotine pouch company based in Austin, Texas and backed by 8VC. The opinions expressed in Fortune.com commentary pieces are solely the views of their authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and beliefs of Fortune.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © Miami Select.