Connect with us

Vermont

The Supreme Court hears challenges to Trump’s tariffs with Vermont ties – VTDigger

Published

on

The Supreme Court hears challenges to Trump’s tariffs with Vermont ties – VTDigger


The Supreme Court is seen in the distance in Washington, D.C. on Feb. 20, 2025. File photo by J. Scott Applewhite/AP

This story is based on stories by Violet Jira published on Nov. 5, 2025 by NOTUS, one before and one after the oral arguments. 

The U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments Wednesday related to the legality of President Donald Trump’s use of tariffs in a case that won’t just be deciding the fate of his trade policy, but also could redefine the limits of presidential economic power.

The hearing involved appeals in a pair of cases that challenge the Trump administration’s use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, including one with Vermont ties. Trump has used the law to bypass procedural norms and place extensive tariffs on enemies and trading partners alike without authorization from Congress. 

A federal court ruled against Donald Trump’s tariffs in 2 lawsuits. Vermont was central to both.Advertisement


One of the cases includes Terry Precision Cycling, or Terry Cycling, a women’s cycling apparel company, as one of five small business plaintiffs. The group sued Trump and his administration in the U.S. Court of International Trade in April. In May, a panel of three federal judges struck down most of the president’s tariffs. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit also largely backed the plaintiffs. The case was combined with another brought by private organizations impacted by the tariffs in Wednesday’s arguments in the Supreme Court. 

Advertisement

The court also heard from a representative of 12 attorneys general, including Vermont Attorney General Charity Clark, who sued on similar grounds.

During the arguments, Solicitor General D. John Sauer defended the Trump administration’s actions — sometimes by contradicting the president.

Sauer faced a slew of skeptical inquiries from the justices who seemed to take issue with many of the Trump administration’s arguments, including that the president has broad authority to respond to international emergencies, Congress delegated the presidency this power, and tariffs are not taxes.

Since the Constitution gives Congress the power to tax, the claim that tariffs are not a tax was central to Sauer’s argument, despite the fact that the president has framed them as revenue-raising.

“We don’t contend that what’s being exercised here is the power to tax,” Sauer said. “It’s the power to regulate foreign commerce. These are regulatory tariffs. They are not revenue raising tariffs.”

Advertisement

Trump regularly says tariffs are making the country richer. And earlier this year, the White House floated using tariffs as a revenue raiser to offset the cost of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who spoke recently at the University of Vermont, made clear that she didn’t buy Sauer’s argument on tariffs versus taxes.

“You say tariffs are not taxes, but that’s exactly what they are,” she said. “They’re generating money from American citizens, revenue.”

Burlington-based Terry Cycling , a women’s cycling apparel company, joined four other small businesses to sue President Donald Trump over his tariff policy. Courtesy photo.

‘Simply implausible’

How the justices decide the case will have major implications not just for Trump’s agenda but for how much unilateral power presidents have to regulate commerce. 

During the arguments, Justice Neil Gorsuch leaned heavily into the question of congressional authority. He seemed to take issue with the fact that it would be difficult for Congress to reclaim that authority should the Supreme Court give the Trump administration what it was asking for.

Advertisement

“Congress, as a practical matter, can’t get this power back once it’s handed it over to the president. It’s a one way ratchet toward the gradual but continual accretion of power in the executive branch and away from the people’s elected representatives,” he argued.

Justice Amy Coney Barrett seemed skeptical of the scope of the reciprocal tariffs Trump has placed on dozens of countries, allies and trading partners alike.

“Is it your contention that every country needed to be tariffed because of threats to the defense and industrial base? I mean, Spain, France? I mean, I could see it with some countries, but explain to me why as many countries needed to be subject to the reciprocal tariff policy as are,” she asked.

The small businesses were represented by attorney Neal Katyal. He argued that tariffs are, in fact, a tax, and that the Trump administration was exceeding the authority Congress intended to give to the executive branch when it passed the International Emergency Economic Powers Act.

“It’s simply implausible that in enacting IEEPA, Congress handed the president the power to overhaul the entire tariff system and the American economy in the process, allowing him to set and reset tariffs on any and every product from any and every country at any and all times,” Katyal said.

Advertisement

“And as Justices Gorsuch and Barrett just said, this is a one-way ratchet,” he continued. “We will never get this power back if the government wins this case. What president wouldn’t veto legislation to rein this power in and pull out the tariff power?”

The Supreme Court has until the end of its term next summer to make a decision, but the case has so far been on an expedited track, leading some experienced court watchers to expect a decision before the end of the year.

Other routes for tariffs

The White House has projected confidence in its ability to win the case — press secretary Karoline Leavitt said officials believe the Supreme Court will rule in their favor. Still, contingency plans have long been in the works.

“The White House is always preparing for plan B,” she said at a briefing. “It would be imprudent of the president’s advisers not to prepare for such a situation. With that said, we are 100% confident in the president and his team’s legal argument and the merits of the law in this case, and we remain optimistic that the Supreme Court is going to do the right thing. The importance of this case cannot be overstated.”

Trump has used the threat of tariffs in matters far beyond trade. The administration used a tariff investigation to pressure Brazil over its decision to prosecute former President Jair Bolsonaro. Trump attempted to use trade negotiations to stop Canada from backing Palestinian statehood. The threat of steep tariffs has been an essential leverage point in his peace negotiations between countries like India and Pakistan, as well as Russia and Ukraine.

Advertisement

The Supreme Court’s decision could stymie all of this.

Administration officials have indicated that even if they lose the case, they would find another way to levy tariffs.

There are multiple legal avenues to enact tariffs. Top Trump trade adviser Peter Navarro has signaled the administration was considering use of Section 122 and then Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, if use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act is deemed unlawful.

Multiple trade experts NOTUS spoke to said this would be the most plausible course of action for Trump to keep his tariffs alive if the court rules against him.

Peter Harrell, who served as senior director for international economics and competitiveness in the Biden White House, said “the most obvious choice” for the White House to temporarily maintain tariffs would be to invoke Section 122. That would allow tariffs of up to 15% for as long as 150 days on countries whose trade with the U.S. is unjustifiably imbalanced.

Advertisement

“That, to me, looks like the sort of obvious, immediate stop gap they could pull to keep many of their tariffs in place for a couple of months while they figure out what the longer term plan is,” he said.

Section 301 of the trade act allows an administration to launch investigations into specific countries and implement tariffs based on the results of that investigation. There are already active Section 301 investigations into China, Brazil and Nicaragua; the latter two were started under the administration of President Joe Biden. The Trump administration could begin more of them, but the investigations take months and again open the administration up to the possibility of lawsuits.

Over the past few months, the Trump administration has expanded its use of Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, which allows him to put restrictions on the import of certain goods if they are found after an investigation to threaten national security.

But none of these powers is as expansive as the International Economic Emergency Powers Act, which the Trump administration has used to enact crushing tariffs with the stroke of a pen.

The International Economic Emergency Powers Act “only requires a finding of a national emergency, which is a more unilateral power within the president to make that determination,” said Everett Eissenstat, a partner at Squire Patton Boggs who represented the Trump administration on international trade matters as deputy director of the National Economic Council during Trump’s first term. “There’s no investigation, there’s no congressional consultation, it’s just a declaration of emergency, and that unleashes the power to regulate commerce, regulate importation.”

Advertisement

He added that there “were certainly more limitations” on Section 301 and Section 232.

If the Supreme Court were to rule in the Trump administration’s favor, it’s possible that the ruling wouldn’t just give the administration the legal go-ahead on current tariff policy, but open the door for the International Economic Emergency Powers Act to be used even more broadly than Trump is currently using it.

For the importers, business owners, consumers and taxpayers who are impacted by the president’s trade and tariff policy, a decision from the Supreme Court in either direction is unlikely to offer significant relief from the pressures of the Trump tariff economy.

“Unfortunately, if you’re a business, you can celebrate a Supreme Court win if that’s the way it goes, but you’re not going to be off the hook,” Riley said. “Trump will continue to impose tariffs, continue to impose costs on Americans, but he just won’t have the unlimited authority that he’ll have if the Supreme Court allows the IEEPA tariffs to remain in place.”





Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Vermont

VT Lottery Mega Millions, Gimme 5 results for March 27, 2026

Published

on


Powerball, Mega Millions jackpots: What to know in case you win

Here’s what to know in case you win the Powerball or Mega Millions jackpot.

Just the FAQs, USA TODAY

The Vermont Lottery offers several draw games for those willing to make a bet to win big.

Advertisement

Those who want to play can enter the MegaBucks and Lucky for Life games as well as the national Powerball and Mega Millions games. Vermont also partners with New Hampshire and Maine for the Tri-State Lottery, which includes the Mega Bucks, Gimme 5 as well as the Pick 3 and Pick 4.

Drawings are held at regular days and times, check the end of this story to see the schedule.

Here’s a look at March 27, 2026, results for each game:

Winning Vermont Mega Millions numbers from March 27 drawing

13-27-28-41-62, Mega Ball: 16

Check Vermont Mega Millions payouts and previous drawings here.

Advertisement

Winning Gimme 5 numbers from March 27 drawing

05-10-18-38-39

Check Gimme 5 payouts and previous drawings here.

Winning Pick 3 numbers from March 27 drawing

Day: 0-0-8

Evening: 7-6-3

Check Pick 3 payouts and previous drawings here.

Advertisement

Winning Pick 4 numbers from March 27 drawing

Day: 3-5-4-1

Evening: 9-5-7-6

Check Pick 4 payouts and previous drawings here.

Winning Millionaire for Life numbers from March 27 drawing

06-09-28-33-46, Bonus: 04

Check Millionaire for Life payouts and previous drawings here.

Advertisement

Feeling lucky? Explore the latest lottery news & results

Are you a winner? Here’s how to claim your lottery prize

For Vermont Lottery prizes up to $499, winners can claim their prize at any authorized Vermont Lottery retailer or at the Vermont Lottery Headquarters by presenting the signed winning ticket for validation. Prizes between $500 and $5,000 can be claimed at any M&T Bank location in Vermont during the Vermont Lottery Office’s business hours, which are 8a.m.-4p.m. Monday through Friday, except state holidays.

For prizes over $5,000, claims must be made in person at the Vermont Lottery headquarters. In addition to signing your ticket, you will need to bring a government-issued photo ID, and a completed claim form.

All prize claims must be submitted within one year of the drawing date. For more information on prize claims or to download a Vermont Lottery Claim Form, visit the Vermont Lottery’s FAQ page or contact their customer service line at (802) 479-5686.

Vermont Lottery Headquarters

Advertisement

1311 US Route 302, Suite 100

Barre, VT

05641

When are the Vermont Lottery drawings held?

  • Powerball: 10:59 p.m. Monday, Wednesday, and Saturday.
  • Mega Millions: 11 p.m. Tuesday and Friday.
  • Gimme 5: 6:55 p.m. Monday through Friday.
  • Lucky for Life: 10:38 p.m. daily.
  • Pick 3 Day: 1:10 p.m. daily.
  • Pick 4 Day: 1:10 p.m. daily.
  • Pick 3 Evening: 6:55 p.m. daily.
  • Pick 4 Evening: 6:55 p.m. daily.
  • Megabucks: 7:59 p.m. Monday, Wednesday and Saturday.
  • Millionaire for Life: 11:15 p.m. daily

What is Vermont Lottery Second Chance?

Vermont’s 2nd Chance lottery lets players enter eligible non-winning instant scratch tickets into a drawing to win cash and/or other prizes. Players must register through the state’s official Lottery website or app. The drawings are held quarterly or are part of an additional promotion, and are done at Pollard Banknote Limited in Winnipeg, MB, Canada.

This results page was generated automatically using information from TinBu and a template written and reviewed by a Vermont editor. You can send feedback using this form.

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

Vermont

Capitol Recap: Act 181 debate pokes at the heart of Vermont’s rural-urban dynamics

Published

on

Capitol Recap: Act 181 debate pokes at the heart of Vermont’s rural-urban dynamics


This story, by Report for America corps member Carly Berlin, was produced through a partnership between VTDigger and Vermont Public.

The Vermont Senate passed a bill on Thursday that will delay the implementation of Act 181, a contentious 2024 law that overhauled the state’s land use permitting system.

But that vote followed several rounds of heated debate over rolling back or further postponing land conservation measures, fueled by a Tuesday protest attended by hundreds of rural landowners who called on lawmakers to repeal the law altogether.

The sparring over Act 181 has surfaced a rural-urban divide at the Statehouse. Rural conservatives argue that the law’s benefits flow only to Vermont’s larger cities and towns, and that its conservation rules place an undue burden on private property owners. Democrats have defended the law’s goals to both boost housing in downtowns and villages and increase environmental protections elsewhere, though they’ve heeded calls to pump the brakes.

Advertisement

Details: Vermont is overhauling Act 250. Here’s what the development maps look like so far

On the Senate floor, Republicans contended that new development regulations set forth in Act 181, which bolster protections over sensitive ecosystems, effectively undermine personal property rights. Sen. Steve Heffernan, R-Addison, framed the issue around affordability — wealthy second home-owners can afford more land-use permits, he said, but regular Vermonters can’t.

“We must ask ourselves … are we protecting Vermont’s lands, or pricing Vermonters out of it?” Heffernan said.

Brian Stevenson

/

Advertisement

Vermont Public

Sen. Steve Heffernan, R-Addison, photographed in January 2025. Heffernan framed the Act 181 issue around affordability.

Democrats, who control the chamber, countered that the new rules are critical for preserving Vermont’s landscape for the good of the broader community.

“Future generations may not have the same ecosystems that we have access to because of development,” said Sen. Becca White, D-Windsor.

The bill in question, S.325, is a set of tweaks to Act 181, which the Legislature passed over Republican Gov. Phil Scott’s objections two years ago.

Act 181 aimed to encourage more homebuilding in already-developed areas of Vermont by removing state level review under Act 250, Vermont’s signature land use law. At the same time, the law beefed up protections for to-be-determined critical natural resources.

Advertisement

The 2024 law mandated a first-of-its-kind mapping effort that will essentially dictate where future development will be subject to Act 250 scrutiny, and where it won’t be, through a tiered land-use classification system.

That mapping process is still underway, and the board overseeing it has asked for more time to complete its work — in part because of feedback from municipal officials and rural residents who objected to early drafts.

S.325 would postpone the implementation of many pieces of Act 181. It would extend temporary housing exemptions, delay the start of a new “road rule” that would require a permit for private road construction over a certain length in much of the state until 2030 and pushes out the beginning of new “Tier 3” rules. These rules would heighten scrutiny over building near headwater streams, habitat connectors and rare natural communities.

A man wearing a suit sits at the end of a table. Two other men can be seen in the foreground

Brian Stevenson

/

Advertisement

Vermont Public

Sen. Russ Ingalls, R-Essex District, chairs a meeting of the Senate Committee on Agriculture on Jan. 28, 2025.

The fate of Tier 3 garnered the most attention on the Senate floor. Republicans backed an amendment on Wednesday to scrap the tier entirely.

Sen. Russ Ingalls, R-Essex, a cosponsor of the amendment and an organizer of Tuesday’s rally, argued that the entirety of his Northeast Kingdom district would fall into the tier and suggested that a majority of Vermonters currently live in Tier 3 areas.

“We should be able to live like the rest of Vermont does, and not be restricted,” Ingalls said.

Yet the bounds of Tier 3 have not yet been set, and the Land Use Review Board, which is creating its boundaries, has said the tier will only make up a small portion of land in Vermont. The board is also looking to limit what kinds of construction would trigger the need for an Act 250 permit in these zones.

Advertisement

“It may be that a single house, for instance, depending on where it is, doesn’t even matter. It won’t be counted,” said Sen. Seth Bongartz, D-Bennington, one of the architects of Act 181 when he served in the House.

The amendment to roll back Tier 3 ultimately failed in a party-line vote on Wednesday. A separate amendment to further delay its implementation failed on Thursday. Another Republican-backed amendment that was adopted eases state regulations for housing in rural areas that lack local zoning.

“We absolutely hear the concerns from different corners of the state of Vermont and we take those seriously.”

House Speaker Jill Krowinski, D-Burlington

Scott, Act 181’s longest-standing detractor, vetoed the legislation in 2024, arguing that it was a “conservation bill” that did little to boost housing growth in rural areas. The governor said at a Thursday press conference that he thinks the bill to delay its implementation is “moving in the right direction, but we need more.”

Advertisement

Scott was pleased to see protesters this week heeding his message.

“I’ve said this before: this hurts rural Vermont. And now they’re just waking up to the fact that, yes, indeed, it will,” Scott said.

The bill now heads to the House. House Speaker Jill Krowinski, D-Burlington, said she sees the need to delay Act 181 — and that she hears the upswell of pushback against the law from beyond the Statehouse.

“We absolutely hear the concerns from different corners of the state of Vermont and we take those seriously,” Krowinski said.

A woman sits at a table

Brian Stevenson

Advertisement

/

Vermont Public

Rep. Amy Sheldon, D-Middlebury, is chair of the House Committee on Environment. Photographed at the Statehouse on Feb. 5, 2025.

S.325 will land in the House environment committee, helmed by Rep. Amy Sheldon, D-Middlebury, one of Act 181’s initial drafters. Sheldon understands the rationale to postpone pieces of its implementation, she said in a Wednesday interview. But she is not open to rolling back elements of the 2024 law.

Sheldon believes that some of the arguments raised by opponents of the law are overstated and misguided. She still stands by the core aims of the law, she said, gesturing toward Vermont’s state motto.

“We’re balancing freedom and unity, right? That’s what we do,” Sheldon said.

Advertisement





Source link

Continue Reading

Vermont

46 anti-Trump No Kings protests planned in Vermont. How to go

Published

on

46 anti-Trump No Kings protests planned in Vermont. How to go


Vermonters protest against deportations, stand in solidarity with LA

Vermonters marched up Church Street in solidarity of Los Angeles protestors and against the federal government’s immigration policies June 10.

Large scale anti-Trump protests are coming to Vermont for a third time, with at least 46 No Kings protests planned across the state for March 28.

This round of No Kings protests might be the biggest so far: organizers anticipate it’ll be “one of the largest single-day nonviolent nationwide protests in U.S. history,” with more than 3,000 events already planned across the country on March 28.

Advertisement

“As President Trump escalates his attempts to control us, it is on us, the people, to show that we will fight to protect one another and our country,” the “No Kings” website says. “If he believes we will roll over and allow him to take our freedoms, he is mistaken. We are coming together again on March 28 because we know we can overcome this repression when we unite.”

In Vermont, protests are being held in all corners of the state, from Bennington to Newport. There are about six protests listed in Burlington, including a march to City Hall, a New North End Honk and Wave and a rally at the intersection of Shelburne Rd and Hannaford Drive.

Here’s what to know ahead of the protests.

What are ‘No Kings’ protests and what does it mean?

In June 2025, large crowds of Vermont residents took part in the first round of “No Kings Day” protests, planned the same day as the U.S. Army’s 250th anniversary celebration and the president’s birthday.

Advertisement

Another wave of nationwide “No Kings” protests came several months later in October, in which over seven million Americans joined events in all 50 states, according to the organization. In Burlington, thousands of protesters brought homemade signs protesting Trump, dressed in colorful inflatable costumes, played music and chanted.

Organizers behind the No Kings protests say that it is a “peaceful movement” to push back on President Donald Trump’s policies, including on immigration, foreign policy and the economy.

“With every ICE raid, every escalation abroad, and every abuse of power at home, Americans are rising up in opposition to Trump’s attempt to rule through fear and force. Each day Trump crosses a new red line, and more people are deciding they’ve had enough,” said Ezra Levin, co-executive director of Indivisible, one of the many organizations backing the mass protests.

Others include American Civil Liberties Union, the Human Rights Campaign, MoveOn and 50501.

Advertisement

No Kings protests near me: See events, rallies in Vermont

As of 2 p.m. on March 26, there were 46 No Kings events planned in Rhode Island for March 28. Some towns and cities are holding multiple events.

Here’s a list of events in Burlington:

  • Burlington New North End Honk and Wave: 11a.m. – 12:30 p.m., 1127 North Ave, Burlington
    • “Invite your friends and neighbors and meet up at 11 a.m. at 1127 North Avenue along the sidewalks at the entrances of the Ethan Allen Shopping Plaza (home to Hannaford Supermarket and many other shops). Bring your signs, banners, noise makers, and American flags,” the listing reads. “This joyous, non-violent honk and wave action will wrap up at 12:30 p.m. Following the Honk and Wave, participants are welcome to proceed to City Hall Park to join the conclusion of the North End and South End marches.”
  • Patchen Road Overpass: 11 a.m. – 1 p.m., Patchen Road & Landfill Road, South Burlington
    • “We’ll be unfurling our huge NO KINGS banners on the overpass as 4,000 – 5,000 vehicles per hours pass below on Interstate 89. Bring a sign, bring an American flag, and bring a friend,” reads the listing. It says to register and to follow the guidance of safety marshals, and encourages attendees to carpool as “parking is tight.”
  • Burlington South End March: 11 a.m. – 1:30 p.m., Calahan Park, 45 Locust St, Burlington
    • “We’ll be marching from Calahan Park to City Hall Park,” says the event description. “If you don’t want to march or are unable please join us at City Hall park at 12:30 p.m. for singing, chanting and more.”
  • South Burlington: 11 a.m. – 12:30 p.m., Intersection of Shelburne Rd and Hannaford Dr in South Burlington, 1001 Shelburne Rd, South Burlington, VT
    • “Join Champlain Valley Indivisible at the intersection of Shelburne Rd and Hannaford Drive in South Burlington to stand up and speak out against this administration’s unjust and cruel acts of violence,” the event listing says, adding that those interested should register.
  • Burlington March to City Hall: 11:30 a.m. – 12:30 p.m., 1 S Prospect St., Burlington
  • Burlington Old North End March: 11 a.m. – 1:30 p.m., Roosevelt Park, 57 Oak St., Burlington
    • “We’ll be marching from Roosevelt park to City Hall Park,” the listing says. “If you don’t want to march or are unable please join us at City Hall park at 12:30 p.m. for singing, chanting and more.”

Here’s a list of all the towns in Vermont holding protests so far, plus when, where and other helpful information listed on the event pages or provided in press releases:

  • Bellow Falls
  • Bennington
  • Bradford
  • Brandon
  • Brattleboro
  • Burlington
  • Charlotte
  • Chester
  • Essex Junction
  • Fair Haven
  • Fairfax
  • Hardwick
  • Hartford
  • Huntington
  • Jericho
  • Manchester
  • Middlebury
  • Milton
  • Milton
  • Montpelier
  • Morrisville
  • Newbury
  • Newport
  • Northfield
  • Randolph
  • Randolph
  • Richmond
  • Rutland
  • Saint Johnsbury
  • Shelburne
  • South Burlington
  • South Burlington
  • St. Albans
  • Wallingford
  • Waterbury
  • Westfield
  • Williston
  • Wilmington
  • Windsor
  • Winooski
  • Wolcott
  • Woodstock

More events may be planned. You can check the map on the No Kings website to see if your town is holding a protest.

What time are No Kings events?

“No Kings” protests in Vermont start at various times on March 28, with some events planned at 10 a.m. and others planned throughout the afternoon, according to the online map of events.

Contributing: Paris Barraza

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending