WASHINGTON (AP) — A federal court on Wednesday blocked President Donald Trump from imposing sweeping tariffs on imports under an emergency-powers law, swiftly throwing into doubt Trump’s signature set of economic policies that have rattled global financial markets, frustrated trade partners and raised broader fears about inflation intensifying and the economy slumping.

The ruling from a three-judge panel at the New York-based U.S. Court of International Trade came after several lawsuits arguing Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariffs exceeded his authority and left the country’s trade policy dependent on his whims.

Trump has repeatedly said the tariffs would force manufacturers to bring back factory jobs to the U.S. and generate enough revenue to reduce federal budget deficits. He used the tariffs as a negotiating cudgel in hopes of forcing other nations to negotiate agreements that favored the U.S., suggesting he would simply set the rates himself if the terms were unsatisfactory.

White House spokesperson Kush Desai said that trade deficits amount to a national emergency “that has decimated American communities, left our workers behind, and weakened our defense industrial base — facts that the court did not dispute.”

The administration, he said, remains “committed to using every lever of executive power to address this crisis and restore American Greatness.”

But for now, Trump might not have the threat of import taxes to exact his will on the world economy as he had intended, since doing so would require congressional approval. What remains unclear is whether the White House will respond to the ruling by pausing all of its emergency power tariffs in the interim.

Trump might still be able to temporarily launch import taxes of 15% for 150 days on nations with which the U.S. runs a substantial trade deficit. The ruling notes that a president has this authority under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974.

The ruling amounted to a categorical rejection of the legal underpinnings of some of Trump’s signature and most controversial actions of his four-month-old second term. The administration swiftly filed notice of appeal — and the Supreme Court will almost certainly be called upon to lend a final answer — but it casts a sharp blow.

The case was heard by three judges: Timothy Reif, who was appointed by Trump, Jane Restani, named to the bench by President Ronald Reagan and Gary Katzmann, an appointee of President Barack Obama.

“The Worldwide and Retaliatory Tariff Orders exceed any authority granted to the President by IEEPA to regulate importation by means of tariffs,” the court wrote, referring to the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act.

The ruling left in place any tariffs that Trump put in place using his Section 232 powers from the Trade Expansion Act of 1962. He put a 25% tax on most imported autos and parts, as well as on all foreign-made steel and aluminum. Those tariffs depend on a Commerce Department investigation that reveals national security risks from imported products.

It was filed in the U.S. Court of International Trade, a federal court that deals specifically with civil lawsuits involving international trade law.

While tariffs must typically be approved by Congress, Trump has said he has the power to act to address the trade deficits he calls a national emergency.

He is facing at least seven lawsuits challenging the levies. The plaintiffs argued that the emergency powers law does not authorize the use of tariffs, and even if it did, the trade deficit is not an emergency because the U.S. has run a trade deficit with the rest of the world for 49 consecutive years.

Trump imposed tariffs on most of the countries in the world in an effort to reverse America’s massive and long-standing trade deficits. He earlier plastered levies on imports from Canada, China and Mexico to combat the illegal flow of immigrants and the synthetic opioids across the U.S. border.

His administration argues that courts approved then-President Richard Nixon’s emergency use of tariffs in 1971, and that only Congress, and not the courts, can determine the “political” question of whether the president’s rationale for declaring an emergency complies with the law.

Trump’s Liberation Day tariffs shook global financial markets and led many economists to downgrade the outlook for U.S. economic growth. So far, though, the tariffs appear to have had little impact on the world’s largest economy.

The lawsuit was filed by a group of small businesses, including a wine importer, V.O.S. Selections, whose owner has said the tariffs are having a major impact and his company may not survive.

A dozen states also filed suit, led by Oregon. “This ruling reaffirms that our laws matter, and that trade decisions can’t be made on the president’s whim,” Attorney General Dan Rayfield said.

Oregon Sen. Ron Wyden, top Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee, said the tariffs had “jacked up prices on groceries and cars, threatened shortages of essential goods and wrecked supply chains for American businesses large and small.″

Reporting by Lindsay Whitehurst and Josh Boak, Associated Press. AP writers Zeke Miller and Paul Wiseman contributed.

Editor’s note: This story has been updated to correct the spelling of the last name of Judge Gary Katzmann, from Katzman in earlier versions of the story.

The U.S. Department of Justice and the White House are looking at pardoning the two men convicted in the 2020 plot to kidnap Gov. Gretchen Whitmer.

President Donald Trump told reporters on Wednesday that the men convicted in the kidnapping plot were victims of “a railroad job.”

Whitmer shared her reaction to the news with WDET’s Russ McNamara at the Mackinac Policy Conference on Thursday, saying she’s not happy that the justice department — and the president — are even considering pardons.

“When the man took a shot at Donald Trump when he was on the campaign trail in Pennsylvania, I was one of the first office holders on either side of the aisle to condemn it,” Whitmer said. “Anything short of condemning political violence does a disservice to every American.”

Whitmer has been a frequent visitor to the White House this year, asking for federal aid for this spring’s ice storms and helping to secure a new fighter mission at the Selfridge Air National Guard Base.

She said she would be “incredibly disappointed” to see the administration take that action, and that she “certainly will be conveying that to the White House.”

The two men seeking pardons — Barry Croft Jr., 49, and Adam Fox, 42 — were convicted in 2022 of conspiracy for their roles in the alleged kidnapping plot, and are serving a 20-year and 16-year prison sentence, respectively.

On securing a semiconductor ‘fab’ in Michigan

Whitmer also spoke about her stated goal of landing a massive microchip factory for Michigan before the end of her term at the start of 2027. She shared that while federal support would be needed to get the project “over the finish line,” she remains optimistic about getting it done before she leaves office.

“With so many pressures right now in our economy around tariffs and all the chaos, diversifying our economy and landing a chip fab — a plant — it’s so important to all the things that we as Americans rely on and want to do in the future, and this is something that I think would be a huge win for Michigan.”

–WDET’s Jenny Sherman contributed to this report

Use the media player above to hear the full conversation.

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump used a White House meeting to forcefully confront South African President Cyril Ramaphosa, accusing the country of failing to address Trump’s baseless claim of the systematic killing of white farmers.

Trump even dimmed the lights of the Oval Office to play a video of a far-left politician chanting a song that includes the lyrics “kill the farmer.” He also leafed through news articles to underscore his point, saying the country’s white farmers have faced “death, death, death, horrible death.”

Trump had already cut all U.S. assistance to South Africa and welcomed several dozen white South African farmers to the U.S. as refugees as he pressed the case that a “genocide” is underway in the country.

The U.S. president, since his return to office, has launched a series of accusations at South Africa’s Black-led government, claiming it is seizing land from white farmers, enforcing antiwhite policies and pursuing an anti-American foreign policy.

Experts in South Africa say there is no evidence of whites being targeted for their race, although farmers of all races are victims of violent home invasions in a country with a high crime rate.

“People are fleeing South Africa for their own safety,” Trump said. “Their land is being confiscated and in many cases they’re being killed.”

Ramaphosa pushed back against Trump’s accusation. The South African leader had sought to use the meeting to set the record straight and salvage his country’s relationship with the United States. The bilateral relationship is at its lowest point since South Africa enforced its apartheid system of racial segregation, which ended in 1994.

“We are completely opposed to that,” Ramaphosa said of the behavior alleged by Trump in their exchange. He added, “that is not government policy” and “our government policy is completely, completely against what he was saying.”

Trump was unmoved.

“When they take the land, they kill the white farmer,” he said.

Trump appeared prepared to confront Ramaphosa at the start of the meeting while journalists were present. Videos were cued up on a large TV set to show a clip of an opposition party leader, Julius Malema, leading an old anti-apartheid song.

The song has been contentious for years in the country because of its central lyrics “kill the Boer” and “shoot the Boer” — with Boer a word that refers to a white farmer. Malema, featured in the video, is not part of the country’s governing coalition.

Another clip played showed white crosses on the side of a road, described as a memorial for white farmers who were killed. Ramaphosa seemed baffled. “I’d like to know where that is, because this I’ve never seen.”

Trump kicked off the meeting by describing the South African president as a “truly respected man in many, many circles.” He added: “And in some circles he’s considered a little controversial.”

Ramaphosa chimed in, playfully jabbing back at a U.S. president who is no stranger to controversy. “We’re all like that,” Ramaphosa said.

Trump issued an executive order in February cutting all funding to South Africa over some of its domestic and foreign policies. The order criticized the South African government on multiple fronts, saying it is pursuing antiwhite policies at home and supporting “bad actors” in the world like the Palestinian militant group Hamas and Iran.

Trump has falsely accused the South African government of rights violations against white Afrikaner farmers by seizing their land through a new expropriation law. No land has been seized and the South African government has pushed back, saying U.S. criticism is driven by misinformation.

The Trump administration’s references to the Afrikaner people — who are descendants of Dutch and other European settlers — have also elevated previous claims made by Trump’s South African-born adviser Elon Musk and some conservative U.S. commentators that the South African government is allowing attacks on white farmers in what amounts to a genocide.

The administration’s concerns about South African policies cut even deeper than the concerns about white farmers.

South Africa has also angered Trump over its move to bring charges at the International Court of Justice, accusing Israel of committing genocide against Palestinians in Gaza. Ramaphosa has also faced scrutiny in Washington for his past connections to MTN Group, Iran’s second-largest telecom provider. It owns nearly half of Irancell, a joint venture linked with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. Ramaphosa served as board chair of MTN from 2002 to 2013.

Ramaphosa came into the meeting looking to avoid the sort of contentious engagement that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy experienced during his February Oval Office visit, when the Ukrainian leader found himself being berated by Trump and Vice President JD Vance. That disastrous meeting ended with White House officials asking Zelenskyy and his delegation to leave the White House grounds.

The South African president’s delegation included golfers Ernie Els and Retief Goosen, a gesture to the golf-obsessed U.S. president. Ramaphosa brought Trump a massive book about South Africa’s golf courses. He even told Trump that he’s been working on his golf game, seeming to angle for an invitation to the links with the president.

Luxury goods tycoon and Afrikaner Johann Rupert was also in the delegation to help ease Trump’s concerns that land was being seized from white farmers.

At one point, Ramaphosa called on Zingiswa Losi, the president of a group of South African trade unions, who told Trump it is true that South Africa is a “violent nation for a number of reasons.” But she told him it was important to understand that Black men and women in rural areas were also being targeted in heinous crimes.

“The problem in South Africa, it is not necessarily about race, but it’s about crime,” Losi said. “We are here to say how do we, both nations, work together to reset, to really talk about investment but also help … to really address the levels of crime we have in our country.”

Musk also attended Wednesday’s talks. He has been at the forefront of the criticism of his homeland, casting its affirmative action laws as racist against whites.

Musk has said on social media that his Starlink satellite internet service isn’t able to get a license to operate in South Africa because he is not Black.

South African authorities say Starlink hasn’t formally applied. It can, but it would be bound by affirmative action laws in the communications sector that require foreign companies to allow 30% of their South African subsidiaries to be owned by shareholders who are Black or from other racial groups disadvantaged under apartheid.

The South African government says its long-standing affirmative action laws are a cornerstone of its efforts to right the injustices of the white minority rule of apartheid, which denied opportunities to Blacks and other racial groups.

Following the contentious exchange in front of the cameras, Trump hosted Ramaphosa for lunch and further talks.

Ramaphosa, speaking to reporters following his White House visit, downplayed Trump’s criticism, adding he believes “there’s doubt and disbelief in (Trump’s) head” about his genocide charge. He insisted they did not dwell on Trump’s concerns about white farmers in their private conversation.

“You wanted to see drama and something really big happening,” Ramaphosa told reporters following his White House visit. “And I’m sorry that we disappointed you somewhat when it comes to that.”

–Reporting by Gerald Imray and Aamer Madhani, Associated Press. AP writers Seung Min Kim, Chris Megerian, Darlene Superville, Sagar Meghani and Ali Swenson contributed.

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump on Thursday signed an executive order aiming to slash public subsidies to PBS and NPR as he alleged “bias” in the broadcasters’ reporting.

The order instructs the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and other federal agencies “to cease Federal funding for NPR and PBS” and further requires that that they work to root out indirect sources of public financing for the news organizations. The White House, in a social media posting announcing the signing, said the outlets “receive millions from taxpayers to spread radical, woke propaganda disguised as ‘news.’”

It’s the latest move by Trump and his administration to utilize federal powers to control or hamstring institutions whose actions or viewpoints he disagrees with. Since taking office, Trump has ousted leaders, placed staff on administrative leave and cut off hundreds of millions of dollars in funding to artists, libraries, museums, theaters and others, through takeovers of the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts and the National Endowment for the Humanities. Trump has also pushed to withhold federal research and education funds from universities and punish law firms unless they agreed to eliminate diversity programs and other measures Trump has found objectionable.

The broadcasters get roughly half a billion dollars in public money through the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, and have been preparing for the possibility of stiff cuts since Trump’s election, as Republicans have long complained about them.

Paula Kerger, PBS’ CEO and president, said in a statement last month that the Trump administration’s effort to rescind funding for public media would “disrupt the essential service PBS and local member stations provide to the American people.”

“There’s nothing more American than PBS, and our work is only possible because of the bipartisan support we have always received from Congress,” she said. “This public-private partnership allows us to help prepare millions of children for success in school and in life and also supports enriching and inspiring programs of the highest quality.”

The Corporation for Public Broadcasting sued Trump earlier this week over his move to fire three members of its five-person board, contending that the president was exceeding his authority and that the move would deprive the board of a quorum needed to conduct business.

Just two weeks ago, the White House said it would be asking Congress to rescind funding for the CPB as part of a $9.1 billion package of cuts. That package, however, which budget director Russell Vought said would likely be the first of several, has not yet been sent to Capitol Hill.

The move against PBS and NPR comes as his administration has been working to dismantle the U.S. Agency for Global Media, including Voice of America and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, which were designed to model independent news gathering globally in societies that restrict the press. Those efforts have faced pushback from federal courts, who have ruled in some cases that the Trump administration may have overstepped its authority in holding back funds appropriated to the outlets by Congress.

—Reporting by AP Congressional Correspondent Lisa Mascaro.

Gov. Gretchen Whitmer is responding to critics of her meetings with President Donald Trump by answering that they’ve yielded results. Whitmer, a Democrat serving her final term as governor, and widely considered a possible future presidential contender, says she still has fundamental disagreements with President Donald Trump. She also says face time with Trump, including a now-famously awkward Oval Office encounter, was worth it to win 21 new fighter jets heading to Selfridge Air National Guard Base in Macomb County.

The Michigan Public Radio Network spoke with the governor Wednesday about cutting a deal with a president with whom she’s had an adversarial relationship.

The following interview has been edited for clarity and length.

Rick Pluta: Why does this Selfridge deal matter, not just to Macomb County, not just to metro Detroit, but to the entire state of Michigan?

GW: Yeah, you know, this is a big deal. So the A-10, which is our fighter mission at Selfridge, is being retired. And the fighter mission matters because we think about Selfridge, it has an economic impact on the state of $850 million a year. There are 30,000 jobs in Michigan that are related to Selfridge directly. And so not having a fighter mission would be a huge problem, not just for Selfridge but for a defense economy that we’ve been building out, advanced manufacturing. We think about aerospace as well as bases in Grayling, Alpena, and in Battle Creek. This has a massive impact on the state of Michigan. So I’ve been working to try to get a new fighter mission at Selfridge every year since I’ve been elected governor, and my predecessors did, as well, and we got it done, 21 F-15 EXs. This is the cutting edge, state-of-the-art planes and it’s gonna have a generational impact on our economy.

RP: How did this come to be? Why now?

GW: Well, you know, after the election — I had been trying to get the Biden administration to do this — after the elections, I said, well, let’s keep going. I’m going to keep trying to work with the Trump administration to get it done. And I was at the National Governors Association dinner at the White House. I raised it at that first opportunity with U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth that night, as well as when I sat next to Donald Trump at the dinner, you know, and I’ve had many conversations and meetings with the president on this issue. I’ve been relentless on this and they were receptive. And despite the fact that we’ve got a lot of differences and we don’t agree on a lot of things, I take every opportunity to make the case for Michigan, whether it’s about tariffs, Asian carp, or ice storms. Selfridge has been a part of all those conversations every time, too.

RP: As you mentioned, you’ve said you will work with everyone, anyone, but you have gotten a lot of pushback from folks within the Democratic Party about your work with this president. Now that this Selfridge deal is done, what’s next? What are your plans for continuing to work with this administration?

GW: I oppose this administration and a lot of things that they’re doing, whether it’s around their — what they’ve done on — you know, I mean, it’s voluminous, the ways that we disagree, the things that we disagree on — from their tariff policy, the chaos that’s been leaked, to the violation of people’s civil rights, to the potential Medicaid cuts that are coming that are going to impact Michigan hospitals and Michiganders everywhere. That being said, I’ve got a duty to continue to try to get as much done for our state as I can. I’ve got to work with people that I don’t always agree with. I always have, and I always will, try to do what’s right for Michigan and that means continuing the conversation on preventing Asian carp from infiltrating the Great Lakes, getting relief for victims of the ice storm. It means continuing to work to try to get more economic development done in Michigan. So I will both fight back when I need to, and try to get Michigan’s priorities done wherever I can.

RP: Finally, Governor, do you think Democratic voters, that is voters in your party, know that you still fundamentally disagree with President Trump?

GW: Yeah, of course they do. My values haven’t changed. My oath is to serve the people of Michigan. It means standing up for our rights, it means fighting back when they’ve got tariff policies that are making Michiganders lose jobs or their costs go up. It also means getting at the table and being there to get a huge investment like Selfridge over the finish line. I can do both. I will do both, that’s the ethos I’ve always led with.