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.
“In the absence of a stay from the [Trade] Court, the United States plans to request emergency relief from the Supreme Court tomorrow to prevent irreparable harm to national security and the economy,” the brief states. It includes extensive annexes laying out the administration’s arguments.
El gobierno sostiene que implementar la sentencia desarmaría varios “acuerdos exitosos” que el Presidente Trump ha establecido con naciones extranjeras. Sin embargo, durante su segundo mandato, no se han firmado acuerdos comerciales vinculantes. Sus únicas acciones significativas han sido un acuerdo no vinculante con el Reino Unido y una reducción parcial de los aranceles que se habían impuesto previamente a China.
Repeating Old Arguments, Facing New Resistance
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.
El gobierno advierte que sin una suspensión, “aunque los aranceles sean finalmente confirmados, el daño a los esfuerzos diplomáticos y económicos de EE.UU. podría ser irreversible”. Afirman que las pérdidas de ingresos serían irrecuperables y que las negociaciones internacionales se verían gravemente afectadas.
A Legal Setback for Trump’s Tariff Policy
The U.S. Court of International Trade ruled unanimously that Trump’s broad tariffs violated the Constitution and federal law, asserting that the president exceeded his authority in invoking emergency powers. The decision struck down key tariffs: 25% on imports from Canada and Mexico, 20% on Chinese goods, and the so-called “reciprocal tariffs” applied globally—initially declared during the controversial “Liberation Day” and later reduced to 10% under market pressure.
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 expanded his comments on social media: “We are experiencing judicial despotism,” he posted on Thursday evening. “The judicial takeover is rampant.”
Kevin Hassett, head of the National Economic Council, told Fox Business
he is sure the decision will be reversed on appeal. Although Trump possesses legal avenues to implement additional tariffs, Hassett mentioned, “We currently have no plans to proceed because we firmly believe this ruling is incorrect.” Leavitt, nonetheless, consistently stressed that Trump still holds those capabilities, allowing for potential future measures.
Supreme Court May Decide
At this moment, the Supreme Court has a 6–3 majority leaning towards conservatism, with three of the conservative judges having been appointed by Trump. Nevertheless, this does not ensure a positive decision. The original verdict was unanimous, endorsed by judges appointed by Trump, Ronald Reagan, and Barack Obama, each contributing to the decision’s cross-party credibility.
Cabinet Officials Warn of Global Fallout
In an extraordinary move, four of Trump’s Cabinet members submitted statements to the Trade Court before its ruling, warning of severe consequences if the president’s tariff authority were revoked.
Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick claimed that the decision would “weaken” recent trade talks. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent cautioned that it could “disrupt current negotiations” and lead to countermeasures. U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer worried that international collaborators might “heighten competition disparities” affecting American exporters. Secretary of State Marco Rubio stated the court ruling would bring about “substantial and irreversible damage to U.S. foreign policy and national security.”
The administration is still in the process of submitting its complete appeal based on the case’s details but is employing every legal and political strategy to maintain Trump’s tariff structure—at least for the time being—before the nation’s supreme court.
