The White House is acting quickly to preserve President Donald Trump’s trade plan after experiencing a significant legal setback on Wednesday, when a federal court invalidated most of his import duties. On that day, government attorneys sought an urgent suspension from the U.S. Court of International Trade. The following day, they submitted a comparable request to the D.C. Court of Appeals. In their 124-page document, they cautioned that if these courts do not halt the decision, they intend to appeal to the Supreme Court as soon as Friday to maintain the tariffs.
This represents the most notable judicial defeat during Trump’s second tenure.
“With no intervention by the [Trade] Court, the United States intends to seek urgent assistance from the Supreme Court tomorrow in order to avoid irreversible damage to national security and the economy,” the document notes. It features comprehensive appendices detailing the administration’s case.
The government claims that enforcing the ruling would unravel several “successful agreements” President Trump has reached with foreign nations. However, no binding trade agreements have been signed under Trump’s second term. His only major moves have been a non-binding agreement with the United Kingdom and a partial rollback of tariffs previously imposed on China.
Reviving Old Discussions, Confronting New Opposition
The legal filing rehashes familiar arguments: that courts lack authority to challenge a president’s decision to invoke emergency powers, and that precedent—namely President Nixon’s emergency tariffs—supports Trump’s actions. However, the court’s decision explicitly addresses that precedent and finds that it actually strengthens the case against Trump’s interpretation.
The government cautions that if there isn’t a pause, “even if the tariffs are eventually supported, the harm to U.S. diplomatic and economic activities might be permanent.” It contends that the loss of revenue would be irretrievable and that global discussions would be considerably weakened.
A Legal Setback for Trump’s Trade Tariff Policy
The U.S. Court of International Trade made a unanimous ruling that Trump’s extensive tariffs were unconstitutional and violated federal law, stating that the president surpassed his authority by using emergency powers. This decision invalidated significant tariffs: 25% on goods from Canada and Mexico, 20% on products from China, and the globally imposed “reciprocal tariffs”—originally proclaimed on the contentious “Liberation Day” and subsequently brought down to 10% due to market pressures.
Political Turmoil: Assaults on the Justice System
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt denounced the ruling as “judicial overreach” and claimed it interferes with the president’s ability to negotiate. “The United States cannot function if President Trump—or any president—has delicate diplomatic and trade efforts thwarted by activist judges,” she said.
Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller expressed more thoughts on social media: “We are currently experiencing judicial tyranny,” he posted Thursday night. “The judiciary’s coup is unchecked.”
Kevin Hassett, director del National Economic Council, mentioned to Fox Business
he is confident the ruling will be overturned on appeal. While Trump has legal options to impose new tariffs, Hassett said, “We have no intention to do that right now because we’re very confident this ruling is wrong.” Leavitt, however, repeatedly emphasized that Trump retains those powers, leaving the door open for further action.
Supreme Court May Decide
The Supreme Court now has a conservative majority of 6–3, with three of these justices chosen by Trump. Nevertheless, this doesn’t ensure a positive result. The first decision was unanimous, authorized by three judges appointed by Trump, Ronald Reagan, and Barack Obama, providing the decision with bipartisan credibility.
Ministers Caution About Worldwide Impact
In an unusual action, four members of Trump’s Cabinet presented declarations to the Trade Court prior to its decision, cautioning about significant consequences if the president’s power to impose tariffs were annulled.
Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick claimed that the ruling would “weaken” the latest trade talks. Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent cautioned that it might “disrupt current negotiations” and lead to counteractions. U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer expressed concern that international counterparts might “worsen competitive imbalances” to the detriment of American exporters. Secretary of State Marco Rubio noted that the court mandate would lead to “severe and lasting damage to U.S. diplomatic and national defense interests.”
The administration has yet to file its full appeal on the merits but is pulling all legal and political levers to preserve Trump’s tariff framework—at least temporarily—before the country’s highest court.