reinstates

Sept. 4 (UPI) — The U.S. Navy has reinstated Rep. Ronny Jackson’s retired rank as rear admiral, three years after he was demoted for his behavior while being the White House physician.

The Texas Republican announced the Navy’s decision to reinstate his rank on X, posting the June 13 letter from Navy Secretary John Phelan.

“After finding good cause to reopen your retired grade determination, and upon review of all applicable reports and references, it is my pleasure to inform you, effective immediately, you are hereby reinstated to the retired grade of Rear Admiral (Lower Half) in the United States Navy,” Phelan said in the letter.

Jackson served as physician to President Barack Obama from 2013 to 2018 and to President Trump during the first year of his first administration, before retiring from the Navy and then being elected to the U.S. House of Representatives.

The Navy then demoted Jackson to the rank of captain in July 2022, following a scathing Pentagon inspector general report that found he “disparaged, belittled, bullied and humiliated” subordinates while serving as the White House physician, “fostering an environment of fear and demoralization.”

It also stated that he had twice inappropriately used alcohol during government trips to the Philippines and Argentina while in charge of medical care for government officials, used Ambien during long overseas flights on government business and made “sexual and denigrating statements” about at least one of his female medical subordinates.

The move is the latest by the Trump administration to seemingly give commendations to those who are loyal to the president.

On his first day in office, Trump issued a mass pardon for the roughly 1,500 people convicted in connection to the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection attempt, including those who attacked police.

He also appointed several loyalists to key U.S. boards, among other appointments and actions, and last week it was announced that he would award his former personal attorney and former New York City mayor, Rudy Giuliani, the Presidential Medal of Freedom.

“I was, and still am, a retired U.S. Navy Rear Admiral, and Joe Biden is a retired old FOOL,” Jackson said.

“After the Biden administration’s politically motivated attacks against me, I am pleased to share that my military rank has been fully restored.”

A federal appeals court has temporarily reinstated (PDF) US President Donald Trump’s tariffs a day after a trade court ruled that it exceeded the authorities granted to the president.

The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington temporarily blocked the lower court’s decision on Thursday, but provided no reasoning for the decision, only giving the plaintiffs until June 5th to respond.

The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit granted an emergency motion from the Trump administration arguing that a halt is “critical for the country’s national security”.

The White House has applauded the move.

“You can assume, even if we lose tariff cases, we will find another way,” trade adviser Peter Navarro said.

Wednesday’s surprise ruling by the US Court of International Trade had threatened to halt or delay Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariffs on most US trading partners, as well as import levies on goods from Canada, Mexico and China related to his accusation that the three countries were facilitating the flow of fentanyl into the US.

The International Court of Trade said tariffs issued under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), which is typically used to address issues of national emergencies rather than addressing the national debt, were considered overreach.

Experts said the IEEPA, which was passed in 1977, is narrow in scope and targets specific countries, US-designated “terrorist organisations”, or gang activity pegged to specific instances. The US, for example, used the law to seize property belonging to the government of Iran during the hostage crisis in 1979 and the property of drug traffickers in Colombia in 1995.

“The 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act doesn’t say anything at all about tariffs,” Bruce Fain, a former US associate deputy attorney general under Ronald Reagan, told Al Jazeera.

Fein added that there is a statute, the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, which allows tariffs in the event of a national emergency. However, he said, it requires a study by the commerce secretary and can only be imposed on a product-by-product basis.

‘Product-by-product’

Despite the appeal court’s reprieve, Wednesday’s decision has been viewed as a blow to the administration’s economic agenda that has thus far led to declining consumer confidence and the US losing its top credit rating.

Experts believe that, ultimately, the tariffs will not last.

Posting on X, formerly known as Twitter, on Thursday, lawyer Peter Harrell, a fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, wrote that, if the trade court’s decision “is upheld, importers should eventually be able to get a refund of [IEEPA] tariffs paid to date. But the government will probably seek to avoid paying refunds until appeals are exhausted.″

“The power to decide the level of tariffs resides with Congress. The IEEPA doesn’t even mention raising tariffs. And it was actually passed in order to narrow the president’s authority. Now the president is using it to rewrite the tariff schedule for the whole world,” Greg Schaffer, professor of international law at Georgetown Law School, told Al Jazeera.

The US trade court did not weigh in on tariffs put in place by other laws, such as the Trade Expansion Act – the law used to justify tariffs on steel, aluminium, and automobiles.

There are additional targets for similar narrow tariffs, such as pharmaceuticals from China. In April, the White House announced that the US Department of Commerce launched an investigation to see if the US reliance on China for active ingredients in key medications posed a national security threat, thus warranting tariffs.

“This is not an issue of whether the president can impose tariffs,” said Fein, the former associate deputy attorney general. “He can under the 1962 act after there’s a study and after showing that it’s not arbitrary and capricious and that it’s a product-by-product, not a country-by-country approach.”

“If he doesn’t like that, he can ask Congress to amend the statute.”