US President Donald Trump lashed out at a reporter during a press conference at the White House on Thursday, calling him a "lunatic" after being pressed on why he had waited until his second term to invoke a decades-old law to impose sweeping tariffs .
The tense exchange began when the reporter referenced a federal appellate court hearing arguments on Trump’s authority to unilaterally levy tariffs under the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA).
"As you know, a federal appellate court today heard oral arguments about whether or not you had the authority to unilaterally impose those tariffs," the reporter said.
"I’m not going to get you to weigh in on the legal arguments, but you’re weighing your decision to do that, your authority to do that, based on a 1977 law," the reporter cotinued.
"Why didn’t you invoke this law," the reporter continued before Trump tried to interject.
"Well, we’ve been winning all along," the US President began, but the reporter pushed back, pressing Trump further.
"I just want to ask you — why didn’t you invoke this law in your first term?" he asked. "You could’ve collected billions upon billions of dollars back then, but instead, you waited until your second term," he added.
Trump, visibly annoyed, fired back, saying, "In my first term, I was busy fighting lunatics like you who were trying to do things incorrectly and inappropriately to a duly elected president."
He insisted that tariffs had, in fact, been imposed during his first term, particularly on China.
"We took in hundreds of billions from China," Trump said. "We took in hundreds of billions of dollars in tariffs," he continued.
Before moving on, he added, “You people didn’t cover it very well.”
During his first term, Trump implemented tariffs on Chinese goods starting in 2018, initially targeting $50 billion worth of products over concerns about intellectual property theft. Those tariffs were expanded in 2019.
Trump has now invoked the IEEPA, a law traditionally used to impose sanctions or freeze assets, to justify new tariffs in his second term, marking the first time a US president has used the statute this way.
Trump administration on Thursday faced tough questioning from appellate judges during a 99-minute hearing at the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, where several of the 11 judges challenged their broad interpretation of IEEPA.
“IEEPA doesn’t even mention the word ‘tariffs’ anywhere,” said Circuit Judge Jimmie Reyna, as quoted by the Associated Press.
Attorney Brett Schumate, arguing for the administration, admitted, “No president has ever read IEEPA this way,” but said Trump acted because he believed the US trade deficit posed a national emergency.
No ruling was made Thursday, but the case is expected to head to the US Supreme Court. It stems from Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariffs announced on April 2, which placed new duties on nearly all imports.
A lower court had earlier ruled that Trump overstepped his authority, a decision the administration is now trying to overturn
Earlier on Thursday, Trump signed an executive order imposing new tariffs, including a 50% duty on Brazilian imports, citing Brazil’s policies and the prosecution of former President Jair Bolsonaro as creating an “economic emergency” under a 1977 law.
The order, part of Trump’s aggressive trade push ahead of the August 1 deadline for new trade deals, targets dozens of US trading partners. Tariffs are set to take effect on August 7 and will impact 68 countries as well as the 27-member European Union.
Countries not specifically listed in the order will face a baseline 10% tariff. A senior official said the rates were determined based on trade imbalances and regional economic dynamics. The move has heightened global tensions as negotiations with the US continue.
The tense exchange began when the reporter referenced a federal appellate court hearing arguments on Trump’s authority to unilaterally levy tariffs under the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA).
"As you know, a federal appellate court today heard oral arguments about whether or not you had the authority to unilaterally impose those tariffs," the reporter said.
"I’m not going to get you to weigh in on the legal arguments, but you’re weighing your decision to do that, your authority to do that, based on a 1977 law," the reporter cotinued.
"Why didn’t you invoke this law," the reporter continued before Trump tried to interject.
"Well, we’ve been winning all along," the US President began, but the reporter pushed back, pressing Trump further.
"I just want to ask you — why didn’t you invoke this law in your first term?" he asked. "You could’ve collected billions upon billions of dollars back then, but instead, you waited until your second term," he added.
Trump just BODIED a fake news reporter ☠
— Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) July 31, 2025
REPORTER: "Why didn't you invoke this law in your first term?"
PRESIDENT TRUMP: "Because in my first term, I was fighting lunatics like YOU!” pic.twitter.com/ZXJU35UcO5
Trump, visibly annoyed, fired back, saying, "In my first term, I was busy fighting lunatics like you who were trying to do things incorrectly and inappropriately to a duly elected president."
He insisted that tariffs had, in fact, been imposed during his first term, particularly on China.
"We took in hundreds of billions from China," Trump said. "We took in hundreds of billions of dollars in tariffs," he continued.
Before moving on, he added, “You people didn’t cover it very well.”
During his first term, Trump implemented tariffs on Chinese goods starting in 2018, initially targeting $50 billion worth of products over concerns about intellectual property theft. Those tariffs were expanded in 2019.
Trump has now invoked the IEEPA, a law traditionally used to impose sanctions or freeze assets, to justify new tariffs in his second term, marking the first time a US president has used the statute this way.
Trump administration on Thursday faced tough questioning from appellate judges during a 99-minute hearing at the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, where several of the 11 judges challenged their broad interpretation of IEEPA.
“IEEPA doesn’t even mention the word ‘tariffs’ anywhere,” said Circuit Judge Jimmie Reyna, as quoted by the Associated Press.
Attorney Brett Schumate, arguing for the administration, admitted, “No president has ever read IEEPA this way,” but said Trump acted because he believed the US trade deficit posed a national emergency.
No ruling was made Thursday, but the case is expected to head to the US Supreme Court. It stems from Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariffs announced on April 2, which placed new duties on nearly all imports.
A lower court had earlier ruled that Trump overstepped his authority, a decision the administration is now trying to overturn
Earlier on Thursday, Trump signed an executive order imposing new tariffs, including a 50% duty on Brazilian imports, citing Brazil’s policies and the prosecution of former President Jair Bolsonaro as creating an “economic emergency” under a 1977 law.
The order, part of Trump’s aggressive trade push ahead of the August 1 deadline for new trade deals, targets dozens of US trading partners. Tariffs are set to take effect on August 7 and will impact 68 countries as well as the 27-member European Union.
Countries not specifically listed in the order will face a baseline 10% tariff. A senior official said the rates were determined based on trade imbalances and regional economic dynamics. The move has heightened global tensions as negotiations with the US continue.
You may also like
Rats will run from gardens if 1 natural item is left outside
Threats to India have exposed US as unreliable partner: Russia
What car finance ruling means for you as drivers could still get compensation
'No formal talks yet with US on F-35 buy': Government in Lok Sabha
Bin men physically attacked and threatened as they try to clear nation's rubbish
