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 crucial judicial defeat of 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.
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.
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 Blow to Trump’s Tariff Doctrine
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 Firestorm: Attacks on the Judiciary
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 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.
The Supreme Court Could Determine
The Supreme Court currently holds a 6–3 conservative majority, with three of the conservative justices appointed by Trump himself. However, that does not guarantee a favorable outcome. The initial ruling was unanimous, signed by three judges nominated by Trump, Ronald Reagan, and Barack Obama, respectively—lending the decision bipartisan legitimacy.
Cabinet Officials Warn of Global Fallout
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.
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.
