The White House is operating at maximum capacity to uphold President Donald Trump’s trade agenda after experiencing a significant legal setback on Wednesday, when a federal court invalidated a large portion of his import tariffs. That same day, government attorneys sought an emergency pause from the U.S. Court of International Trade. On Thursday, they submitted a comparable request to the D.C. Court of Appeals. In their 124-page document, they cautioned that if those courts do not halt the decision, they will petition the Supreme Court as soon as Friday to maintain the tariffs.
This represents the most notable judicial defeat during Trump’s second tenure.
Without an intervention from the [Trade] Court, the United States intends to seek urgent intervention from the Supreme Court tomorrow to avert irreversible damage to both national security and the economy,” the brief indicates. It comprises detailed appendices presenting the administration’s case.
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 document revisits commonly used points: that courts do not possess the power to question a president’s choice to use emergency authority, and that historical examples—specifically President Nixon’s emergency tariffs—validate Trump’s measures. Nevertheless, the ruling directly tackles that historical example and determines that it, in fact, bolsters the argument opposing Trump’s understanding.
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 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 Tempest: Assaults on the Judicial 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 went further on social media: “We are living under judicial tyranny,” he tweeted Thursday night. “The judicial coup is out of control.”
Kevin Hassett, líder del Consejo Económico Nacional, dijo a 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.
The Supreme Court Could Determine
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 a remarkable development, four members of Trump’s Cabinet provided comments to the Trade Court prior to its decision, cautioning about serious repercussions if the president’s tariff powers were withdrawn.
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 government still needs to submit its complete appeal concerning the case’s merits but is using every legal and political strategy to maintain Trump’s tariff system—at least for the time being—in front of the nation’s top court.
