Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Question of the day
Next Post: Isabel’s afternoon roundup
Posted in:
* Click here for the lawsuit. Wednesday press release…
Attorney General Kwame Raoul, as part of a coalition of 12 attorneys general, today filed a lawsuit to block the Trump administration’s illegal tariffs. The case challenges several executive orders that claim the power to increase tariffs without congressional action.
The lawsuit filed by Raoul and the coalition challenges the Trump administration’s executive orders calling for higher tariffs on most products worldwide. These tariffs impose a 145% tariff on most products from China, a 25% tariff on most types of products from Canada and Mexico, and 10% tariffs on most products from the rest of the world. Raoul’s lawsuit also challenges the administration’s plan to raise tariffs on imports from 56 other trading partners on July 9.
“International trade is essential to states’ economies, and the administration’s tariffs will make it more difficult for our residents to purchase the basic goods they need at affordable prices,” Raoul said. “I am proud to join my colleagues in fighting to prevent hardworking Americans from footing the bill for the Trump administration’s unlawful tariffs.”
Raoul and the attorneys general explain in their lawsuit, which was filed in the U.S. Court of International Trade, that only Congress can lay and collect taxes. The administration’s executive orders cite the powers granted by the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA); however, that law applies only when an emergency presents an “unusual and extraordinary threat” from abroad. In short, Raoul and the coalition argue the law does not give the president the power to impose these tariffs. This is the first time in American history that a president has imposed tariffs based on the IEEPA.
In Illinois, the tariffs will cause some state government agencies to agree to pay more for goods to cover the costs of tariffs. For example, the Illinois Department of Innovation & Technology (DOIT) purchases about 15,000 imported personal computers for state employees each year. Because of the tariffs, DOIT was constrained to accept a contract that explicitly permits the vendor to pass on the cost of any tariff to the state of Illinois. Additionally, the uncertainty stemming from the flurry of executive orders makes vendors reluctant to commit to working with the state, impeding long-term procurement planning.
Joining Attorney General Raoul in filing this lawsuit are attorneys general from Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, Oregon and Vermont.
* Click here for the lawsuit. Friday press release…
Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul today co-led a coalition of 19 attorneys general in filing a lawsuit seeking to stop the U.S. Department of Education from withholding federal funding from state and local agencies that refuse to abandon lawful programs and policies promoting equal access to education in K-12 classrooms across the nation.
On April 3, 2025, the Department of Education informed state and local agencies that they must accept the Trump administration’s new and legally incoherent interpretation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 with respect to diversity, equity and inclusion efforts – or else risk immediate and catastrophic loss of federal education funds. In Illinois, this would mean the immediate loss of almost $1.4 billion in congressionally mandated financial support for schools.
“The Trump administration is now attempting to illegally stop the allocation of these Congressionally-mandated funds in order to push a vague, anti-DEI agenda at the expense of some of the most vulnerable children in Illinois and across the country,” Raoul said. “I proudly stand with my fellow Attorneys General to defend this important funding and help ensure that all children have access to a quality public education.”
The administration has not defined which diversity, equity and inclusion practices it finds objectionable, or the basis of its legal objections. Illinois, like many other states, refused to certify its compliance under the terms of the administration’s new requirements, explaining that there is no lawful or practical way to do so given the department’s vague, contradictory and legally unsupported interpretation of Title VI. In filing today’s lawsuit, Attorney General Raoul and the coalition seek to bar the department from withholding any funding based on these unlawful conditions.
The funding at stake includes financial support to ensure that students from rural and low-income families have the same access to high-quality education as their peers, provide special education services, recruit and train highly skilled and dedicated teachers, fund programming for non-native speakers to learn English, provide support to vulnerable children in foster care and without housing, and provide technical programs to put our students on the path to careers.
As a condition of receiving these funds, state and local education agencies provide written assurances they will comply with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination based on race, color or national origin. Illinois has consistently and regularly certified its compliance with Title VI and its implementing regulations. However, the Department of Education’s letter conditioned continued federal financial assistance on state and local education agencies certifying that they are not operating programs inconsistent with the Trump administration’s view that some undefined efforts supporting diversity, equity and inclusion are unlawful.
The letter forced state and local agencies to choose between two untenable options. States could refuse to submit a new certification based on the department’s undefined viewpoint on what constitutes unlawful diversity, equity and inclusion programs, curriculum, instruction, and policies, and place federal funding in peril, or certify compliance and attempt to identify and eliminate lawful diversity, equity and inclusion to the detriment of students. Even if those steps were taken, states could still face liability for failing to fully comply with the department’s vague and ill-defined order. Faced with this choice, Illinois informed the department that it stands by its prior certifications of compliance with Title VI and its lawfully issued implementing regulations already in the department’s possession.
In their lawsuit, Raoul and the multistate coalition assert that the department’s attempt to terminate federal education funding based on its misinterpretation of Title VI violates the Spending Clause, the Appropriations Clause, the separation of powers, and the Administrative Procedures Act.
* AP today…
The federal government is reversing the termination of legal status for international students around the U.S. after many filed court challenges against the Trump administration crackdown, a government lawyer said Friday.
The records in a federal student database maintained by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement had been terminated in recent weeks, often without the students or their schools being notified. Judges around the country had already issued orders temporarily restoring the students’ records in dozens of lawsuits challenging the terminations.
More than 1,200 students nationwide suddenly lost their legal status or had visas revoked, leaving them at risk for deportation. Some left the country while others have gone into hiding or stopped going to class.
In one of the lawsuits, a lawyer for the government read a statement in federal court in Oakland, California, that said ICE was restoring the student status for people whose records were terminated in recent weeks. Also Friday, the statement was read by a government attorney in a separate case in Washington, said lawyer Brian Green, who represents the plaintiff in that case. Green provided The Associated Press with a copy of the statement that the government lawyer emailed to him.
It says: “ICE is developing a policy that will provide a framework for SEVIS record terminations. Until such a policy is issued, the SEVIS records for plaintiff(s) in this case (and other similarly situated plaintiffs) will remain Active or shall be re-activated if not currently active and ICE will not modify the record solely based on the NCIC finding that resulted in the recent SEVIS record termination.”
Context from Politico’s senior legal affairs reporter…
By my count, there had been 103 lawsuits filed in the last 20 days, and judges had issued 50 restraining orders requiring the Trump administration to reverse the terminations. Those decisions came in more than 23 states. www.politico.com/news/2025/04…
— Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney.bsky.social) April 25, 2025 at 10:30 AM
posted by Rich Miller
Friday, Apr 25, 25 @ 1:57 pm
Previous Post: Question of the day
Next Post: Isabel’s afternoon roundup
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Not certain why the 13 states didn’t file directly to the S Ct and claim original jurisdiction pertaining to a dispute between the Federal G and the states- they would get a result on an expedited basis- filing where they did will take many months by which time the damages they claim will have had significant impact
Comment by Sue Friday, Apr 25, 25 @ 2:10 pm
Sue- guessing they want to establish more of a record and a public basis for supporting their position in the face of a 6-3 conservative SC majority.
Comment by Socially DIstant Watcher Friday, Apr 25, 25 @ 2:42 pm
Trump: We want to get rid of the department of Ed and send education back to the states.
Also Trump: We want the department of Ed to tell the states what they can and cannot do iin schools.
Sheesh, pick a lane.
Comment by JS Mill Friday, Apr 25, 25 @ 3:10 pm
@Sue: SCOTUS only has original jurisdiction when a state sues another state, not when a state sues the federal government.
Comment by Quibbler Friday, Apr 25, 25 @ 3:24 pm
The pro business party is now the Democrats. Incredible but there it is.
Comment by low level Friday, Apr 25, 25 @ 4:19 pm