by Jacob Fischler, Arkansas Advocate
August 29, 2025

The economy-wide tariffs President Donald Trump placed on nearly every U.S. trading partner are illegal, a federal appeals court said Friday.

The International Economic Emergency Powers Act does not give the president the power to impose tariffs, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled in a 7-4 decision upholding a May decision from the U.S. Court of International Trade and dealing a blow to Trump’s signature trade policy.

The unsigned majority opinion said the tariffs “exceed the authority delegated to the President by IEEPA’s text.”

However, the judges delayed their ruling from going into effect until October, providing the Trump administration an opportunity to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. The ruling also does not affect other tariffs Trump issued under different authorities, including industry- or material-specific tariffs on automobiles, steel and aluminum.

In a post to social media, Trump said he would appeal to the Supreme Court, where he predicted victory, and repeated his claim that tariffs were an essential economic tool.

“If these Tariffs ever went away, it would be a total disaster for the Country,” he wrote shortly after the decision was published. “It would make us financially weak, and we have to be strong.… If allowed to stand, this Decision would literally destroy the United States of America. At the start of this Labor Day weekend, we should all remember that TARIFFS are the best tool to help our Workers, and support Companies that produce great MADE IN AMERICA products.”

Several Democratic states challenged the IEEPA tariffs. Oregon Solicitor General Benjamin Gutman argued on their behalf on July 31. The 11 judges on the appeals court expressed skepticism of both sides during those arguments.

In a statement Friday, Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield called the ruling “a huge win for Americans.”

“Every court that has reviewed these tariffs has agreed that they are unconstitutional,” he said. “This ruling couldn’t come at a better time as people are walking into their local stores and seeing price increases for school supplies, clothes, and groceries.”

Last updated 11:37 p.m., Aug. 29, 2025

Arkansas Advocate is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Arkansas Advocate maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Sonny Albarado for questions: info@arkansasadvocate.com.

The post Appeals court upholds ruling rejecting sweeping Trump tariffs appeared first on arkansasadvocate.com

Note: The following A.I. based commentary is not part of the original article, reproduced above, but is offered in the hopes that it will promote greater media literacy and critical thinking, by making any potential bias more visible to the reader –Staff Editor.

Political Bias Rating: Center-Left

This content presents a legal ruling against a policy associated with former President Donald Trump, highlighting opposition from Democratic officials and emphasizing the economic impact of tariffs on consumers. The tone is factual but leans slightly toward a critical view of Trump’s trade policies, reflecting a center-left perspective that favors judicial checks on executive power and concerns about economic consequences for everyday Americans.

SUMMARY: Sylvan Hills ended a 20-game losing streak by defeating Maumelle 55-54 in a thrilling zero-week high school football game. Despite trailing at times, the Bears showcased resilience with key plays from Bubba Johnson and Tyler Hampton, tying the game 28-28 at halftime. Maumelle’s Levi Warrior made impressive catches, keeping the Hornets competitive. In the closing seconds, Maumelle nearly secured the win, but a controversial goal-line stop gave Sylvan Hills the victory. This dramatic opener signals an exciting 2025 season ahead, marking Sylvan Hills’ first win in two years and an intense start for both teams.

Sylvan Hills breaks a 20 game losing streak with a 55-54 win over.

Source

by Antoinette Grajeda, Arkansas Advocate
August 28, 2025

A federal judge Thursday evening ordered the Conway School District to remove Ten Commandments posters from classrooms and libraries, less than 24 hours after the district was added to a lawsuit challenging a state law requiring the displays. 

Act 573 of 2025 requires public schools to “prominently display” a 16”x20” poster or framed copy of a “historical representation” of the Ten Commandments. U.S. District Judge Timothy Brooks issued a preliminary injunction earlier this month that blocked enforcement of the law at four Northwest Arkansas school districts — Bentonville, Fayetteville, Springdale and Siloam Springs. 

Seven multifaith families who filed the lawsuit against the four districts in June allege the new law violates the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause, which guarantees that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,” and its Free Exercise Clause, which guarantees that “Congress shall make no law … prohibiting the free exercise [of religion].” 

Supporters of the law argue the Ten Commandments are a historical document because they influenced the nation’s founders and their creation of the country’s legal system.

Central Arkansas school district added to Ten Commandments suit

Brooks granted a request from plaintiffs’ attorneys Wednesday to add the Conway School District as a defendant to the case and families from the district who allege they’ve been injured by the district hanging Ten Commandments displays in their children’s schools. 

Plaintiffs’ attorneys filed a supplemental complaint adding the new parties to the case Thursday and filed a motion for a temporary restraining order on behalf of two Conway School District families. Brooks granted the temporary restraining order later on Thursday and held the request for a preliminary injunction in abeyance. 

“Conway Plaintiffs are identically situated to the original Plaintiffs: They advance the same legal arguments, assert the same constitutional injuries, and request the same relief,” Brooks wrote.

School districts named in the lawsuit and Arkansas attorney general’s office, who intervened in the case, may submit briefs no later than Sept. 8 to address why the current preliminary injunction should not be modified to include the Conway School District, according to the order. 

Brooks also temporarily enjoined the Conway School District from enforcing the law and directed the district to remove all the Ten Commandments posters by 5 p.m. Friday. 

“Conway School District had every opportunity to do the right thing and respect families’ constitutional rights, but instead chose to defy a clear federal ruling,” ACLU of Arkansas Legal Director John Williams said in a statement. “The court has now made it crystal clear: forcing the Ten Commandments into public school classrooms is unconstitutional. We stand ready to defend the rights of every Arkansan against this kind of government overreach.”

The ACLU of Arkansas is representing the plaintiffs along with the national American Civil Liberties Union, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, and the Freedom From Religion Foundation. Simpson Thacher & Bartlett is serving as pro bono counsel. 

“I am disappointed in the ruling but will continue to vigorously defend Act 573,” Attorney General Tim Griffin said in a statement.

Arkansas Advocate is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Arkansas Advocate maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Sonny Albarado for questions: info@arkansasadvocate.com.

The post Judge orders Central Arkansas district to remove Ten Commandments displays appeared first on arkansasadvocate.com

Note: The following A.I. based commentary is not part of the original article, reproduced above, but is offered in the hopes that it will promote greater media literacy and critical thinking, by making any potential bias more visible to the reader –Staff Editor.

Political Bias Rating: Center-Left

The content presents a legal challenge to a state law mandating the display of the Ten Commandments in public school classrooms, emphasizing constitutional concerns and the perspective of civil liberties organizations like the ACLU. It highlights the judicial pushback against the law and includes statements from both supporters and opponents, but the framing and sources cited lean toward protecting separation of church and state, a stance commonly associated with center-left viewpoints.