On these pages, I’ve been documenting the Trump Administration’s repeated assaults on the law and the Constitution. But nothing I’ve seen better captures the contempt this administration has for the legal system than the outrageous 28J letter just filed.
Trump’s tariff policies were declared illegal by The U.S. Court of International Trade back in May 2025.
In July, Trump’s lawyers submitted a 28J letter to get the appeals court to rule in its favor.
A 28J letter is supposed to be a narrow, technical filing, not a campaign press release or a stump speech. Something like, “Dear Court, here’s a new case you may wish to consider.” That’s it. Instead, what Trump’s top lawyers filed before a federal appeals court was an apocalyptic political manifesto masquerading as law.
And here’s the kicker: It was not only inappropriate and disingenuous, but it is also replete with lies, distortions and misleading concepts.
Following is actual text from the letter. It is so ludicrous and insulting that I feel compelled to respond to each claim line by line, which appears below:
“Suddenly, revoking the president’s tariff authority under IEPA would have catastrophic consequences for our national security, foreign policy, and economy. The president believes that our country would not be able to pay back the trillions of dollars that other countries have already committed to pay, which could lead to financial ruin. Other tariff authorities that the president could potentially use are short-term, not nearly as powerful, and would render America captive to the abuses that it has endured from far more aggressive countries. There is no substitute for the tariffs and deals that President Trump has made. One year ago, the United States was a dead country. And now, because of the trillions of dollars being paid by countries that have so badly abused us, America is a strong, financially viable, and respected country. Truly, these deals for trillions of dollars have been reached, and other countries have committed to pay massive sums of money. If the United States were forced to unwind these historic agreements, the president believes that a forced dissolution of the agreement could lead to a 1929 style result. In such a scenario, people would be forced from their homes, millions of jobs would be eliminated, hardworking Americans would lose their savings, and even social security and Medicare could be threatened. In short, the economic consequences would be ruinous instead of unprecedented success.”
My Line-by-Line Observations:
The president believes that our country would not be able to pay back the trillions of dollars that other countries have already committed to pay, which could lead to financial ruin.
My response: “Trillions of dollars” committed to pay??! Other countries have committed to pay zero. Trump tariffs commit us to pay tariffs to The United States Government. Trump may be implying that there is a possibility that foreign countries could reduce their prices to offset the tariffs that are no longer being paid. But it is certainly an unlikely outcome, and certainly not paid by them.
“Lead to financial ruin?” There is no basis for that economically. In fact, most economists think that tariffs are harmful and have hurt, and will continue to hurt, the economy. So this is also disingenuous.
Other tariff authorities that the president could potentially use are short-term, not nearly as powerful, and would render America captive to the abuses that it has endured from far more aggressive countries.
My response: The president is admitting that there shouldn't be tariffs in the first place. He is not supposed to be using “other tariff authorities.” It is not his role, but Congress’ role, to set the tariffs.
There is no substitute for the tariffs and deals that President Trump has made.
My response: There are no substitutes because there is no authorization by Congress to implement these tariffs in the first place. Finding another way to accomplish what is illegal is admitting to wrongdoing.
One year ago, the United States was a dead country.
My response: Absolutely untrue. Although economic growth when the president took office was low, Trump’s reducing regulations and taxes was all that was necessary to fix the economy. The country was not a “dead” country a year ago—and it’s not a strong one now, either. Growth is still low since tariffs are offsetting the benefits of low regulation and taxes.
And now, because of the trillions of dollars being paid by countries that have so badly abused us, America is a strong, financially viable, and respected country.
My response: There aren’t any dollars being paid by foreign countries to us or anybody else. The only dollars that were being paid were from U.S. taxpayers to the U.S. Government.
Truly, these deals for trillions of dollars have been reached, and other countries have committed to pay massive sums of money.
My response: This whole argument is nonsense. The statement above is totally unclear as to whether they are talking about either 1). the reduction of other people’s tariffs against their people, or 2). the reduction of our tariffs against our people. There are two parts to this prong and in neither part have other countries committed to pay anything:
To be clear: When foreign countries have agreed to reduce their tariffs, they have just agreed to reduce the tariffs that their consumers and businesses paid to them.
With regard to the reduction of U.S. tariffs, the actual payments are made by U.S. importers. Even if the president wants to claim that foreign exporters are somehow absorbing the costs through price cuts, that’s speculative at best, and opposite of what history has shown, including during Trump’s first term. There is no binding agreement. There is no commitment.
If the United States were forced to unwind these historic agreements, the president believes that a forced dissolution of the agreement could lead to a 1929 style result.
My response: Nobody—not one serious economist—believes this. It’s just made-up fiction. It’s an insult to the court’s intelligence to even include such a claim in a legal filing.
In such a scenario, people would be forced from their homes, millions of jobs would be eliminated, hardworking Americans would lose their savings, and even Social Security and Medicare could be threatened.
My response: All baloney.
In short, the economic consequences would be ruinous instead of unprecedented success.”
My response: Absolutely ludicrous.
If I didn't know better, it would seem that the president is trying to so insult the court with nonsense as to assure that he will get a negative result from the court. This would give him the opportunity to again blame the court for interfering with his illegal and economically detrimental agenda.
As of August 29, 2025, The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed that most of Trump’s tariffs imposed under IEEPA are illegal, confirming the Court of International Trade’s decision. However, the court allows the tariffs to remain in effect until October 14, 2025, to provide time for a possible Supreme Court appeal. We would expect the Supreme Court to end this circus of tariff abuse.
Purely delusional. The irony is that there’s a non-zero chance that the outcome they painstakingly narrate will occur if these tariffs stay in place. But we are living in a up-is-down MAGAverse that’s entirely feelings based.