The Constitutional Crisis and Global Trade Reconfiguration Triggered by Trump's Declaration of National Emergency: A Systematic Analysis of the 2025 Tariff Emergency

On April 2, 2025, invoking the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), Donald Trump declared a national emergency to initiate sweeping tariff policies. This decision not only breached conventional constitutional constraints on executive power but also reshaped global trade norms through the "national security exception." This paper conducts an in-depth analysis from three dimensions—constitutional logic, economic impact, and international order—to unravel the underlying power dynamics and systemic risks.

I. Constitutional Crisis: Unfettered Expansion of Executive Power
1. Subversive Reconstruction of Legal Frameworks
1.1 Core Contradictions in Constitutional Disputes

• Article I of the U.S. Constitution explicitly vests trade authority in Congress, yet Trump leveraged IEEPA §1702 to redefine "supply chain risks" as national security threats, thereby expanding executive powers.
• The "judicial deference to national security" principle established by the Supreme Court in Trump v. U.S.A.I.B (2023) complicates judicial challenges to presidential threat determinations.

1.2 Normalization Trap of Emergency States

• Since the enactment of the National Emergencies Act in 1976, presidents have declared 76 emergencies, with 60% remaining active (Congressional Research Service data).
• The Trump administration's "rolling emergencies" (e.g., 2019 border wall, 2023 chip legislation) incrementally eroded congressional checks, establishing a governance paradigm dominated by executive power.

2. Failure of Power Balance Mechanisms
2.1 Virtualization of Congressional Oversight

• Section 202(b) of the National Emergencies Act requires joint resolutions by both chambers to terminate emergencies, but presidents may veto such resolutions, which then require a two-thirds majority to override. With Republicans holding 218 seats in the 2025 House (total 435), Democrats face procedural barriers.
• During the 118th Congress, 11 tariff hearings targeting Trump yielded no effective legislative countermeasures, exposing the prioritization of partisan interests over constitutional principles.

2.2 Functional Retreat of Judicial Review

• Federal courts apply a "presumption of reasonableness" standard (stemming from Korematsu v. United States) to emergency measures, placing the burden of proof on plaintiffs.
• Harvard Law School statistics show that between 2000-2025, only 8.7% of lawsuits challenging presidential emergency orders received substantive judicial support, reducing the judiciary to a procedural rubber stamp.

II. Economic Shock: Fracture and Reconfiguration of Global Supply Chains
1. Transmission Effects of Tariff Policies
1.1 Systemic Rise in Cost Structures

• A 10% base tariff compounded with differentiated surtaxes (up to 49%) elevated the comprehensive tax rate for the U.S.-China electronics supply chain to 28.5% (Peterson Institute model).
• Case in point: Apple's relocation of iPhone assembly lines from Zhengzhou to Vietnam resulted in a 22% productivity drop and extended delivery cycles to 45 days (Reuters supply chain report).

1.2 Self-Reinforcing Inflationary Spiral

• Morgan Stanley estimates that blanket tariffs would push the U.S. CPI up by 1.7 percentage points, with durable goods prices surging by 6.2% (e.g., automobiles, appliances).
• Retail giants like Walmart saw inventory costs surge, with Q1 2025 net margins falling below 1.5%, triggering a consumer credit default rate rise to 5.8% (Federal Reserve Financial Stability Report).

2. Militarization of Supply Chains
2.1 Contention for Strategic Resources

• The U.S. Department of Energy allocated $27 billion to establish rare earth strategic reserves, aiming for 35% domestic processing capacity by 2030.
• The EU's Critical Raw Materials Act enforces localization rates for lithium, cobalt, and other minerals, provoking export control countermeasures from resource-rich nations like the DRC and Chile.

2.2 Escalation of Technology Blockades

• The U.S. Commerce Department added 37 Chinese firms (e.g., YMTC, SMIC) to the Entity List, banning ASML from selling High-NA EUV lithography machines to China.
• Japan amended its Specific Secrets Protection Act to restrict exports of sub-14nm semiconductor equipment to China, forming a U.S.-Japan-South Korea technology iron curtain.

III. International Order: Collapse of Multilateral Systems and Alternative Frameworks
1. Disintegration of the WTO Regulatory Regime
1.1 Abuse of Security Exception Clauses

• Over the past five years, the U.S. has invoked GATT Article 21 more times than all other members combined, with 47 WTO cases pending in 2025 and average adjudication periods extending to 4.1 years.
• The EU activated Article 346 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU to impose mirror tariffs on photovoltaic modules and medical devices, rendering multilateralism ineffective.

1.2 Fragmentation of Regional Agreements

• RCEP member states accelerated internal tariff reductions, aiming for 92% zero-tariff goods by 2026, forming a "de-Americanized" supply chain.
• The USMCA introduced a "digital certification of origin" clause, requiring 75% North American localization for auto parts, excluding Asian suppliers.

2. Decentralization Experiments in Monetary Systems
2.1 Breakthroughs in BRICS Mechanisms

• The New Development Bank established a $50 billion "local currency settlement fund" to boost cross-border payments in RMB and INR to 8.3% (Q1 2025 data).
• Saudi Arabia and China signed a petro-yuan agreement, piloting digital yuan settlements for 50% of crude oil trades.

2.2 Rule-Based Competition in Digital Currencies

• The Federal Reserve's CBDC pilot embedded an "emergency payment monitoring module," raising EU central bank concerns about financial sovereignty erosion.
• China's digital yuan enabled automatic tariff clearing with ASEAN nations via smart contracts, constructing a novel settlement network.

IV. Reform Pathways: Institutional Adaptations Amid Crisis
1. Domestic Constitutional Restructuring
1.1 Strengthening Legislative Checks

• The Senate's Emergency Powers Limitation Act (S.3190) proposed a "double veto" system: a simple majority in both chambers could terminate emergencies and prohibit 136 unilateral presidential powers.
• Establish a bipartisan Threat Assessment Committee including military and intelligence representatives to prevent executive monopolization of threat determinations.

1.2 Awakening of Judicial Activism

• The Fifth Circuit Court established a "four-step test" in Texas v. Biden (2025), requiring the government to prove threat imminence, measure necessity, power absence, and separation-of-powers harm.

2. Adaptive Evolution of Global Governance
2.1 Application of Smart Contract Technology

• The IMF piloted blockchain tariff agreements, using on-chain data to automatically trigger sanction relief clauses and reduce political interference.

2.2 Integration of Climate Issues into Rules

• The EU linked its Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) to tariff policies, imposing green surtaxes on nations failing to meet emission standards,action-forcing environmental rule unification.

Conclusion: Civilizational Dilemmas of Normalized Emergency States
Trump's tariff emergency reveals a profound paradox: In the globalization era, absolutist demands for national sovereignty fundamentally clash with interdependence realities. While "economic nationalism" may trigger regional supply chain reconfigurations in the short term, it will exacerbate systemic fragility—when every nation erects walls in the name of security, they inevitably fall into a "zero-sum" prisoner's dilemma.

Historical lessons (e.g., the 1930 Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act) demonstrate that beggar-thy-neighbor policies ultimately backfire. What distinguishes 2025 is that emerging technologies like digital currencies and AI may serve as both divisionary tools and incubators for new governance paradigms. Humanity stands at a crossroads of institutional innovation: Will we repeat the mistakes of the 1930s, or rebuild more resilient order from crisis? The answer will define the trajectory of 21st-century global civilization.