A major US court has struck down large parts of the global tariff program introduced by President Donald Trump. In a 7–4 ruling, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit declared that many of the tariffs issued under Trump’s orders were “invalid as contrary to law.”
Appeals Court Rejects Use of Emergency Powers
The decision focuses on tariffs that were justified under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). This law allows a president to act against “unusual and extraordinary” threats in times of emergency. Trump argued that trade imbalances posed such a threat and declared a national emergency on trade.
The court, however, disagreed. In its 127-page decision, the judges said the law does not give the president the power to impose tariffs. According to the ruling, the authority to set tariffs remains a core power of Congress. The court noted that when Congress intends to grant tariff powers to the president, it does so in clear and explicit terms, which was not the case with IEEPA.
Brazil launches retaliation process after Trump slaps crushing 50 percent tariffs on goods
The ruling means that Trump’s “reciprocal” tariffs, which placed extra duties on dozens of countries, and a baseline 10% tariff on nearly all nations, are now considered illegal. Additional tariffs targeting goods from Canada, Mexico, and China have also been struck down. However, tariffs on steel and aluminium remain unaffected because they were introduced under a different law.
Reaction From President Trump and His Team
President Trump strongly criticised the decision. In a post on his social media platform, Truth Social, he said the ruling was “highly partisan” and warned it would “literally destroy the United States of America” if allowed to stand. He argued that tariffs are necessary to protect the economy and keep the country strong.
Lawyers representing Trump’s administration also warned of severe consequences. In written arguments, they compared the removal of tariff powers to conditions that caused the 1929 stock market crash, which led to the Great Depression. They claimed that cancelling the tariffs could cause “catastrophic consequences” for the economy, national security, and foreign policy.
The lawyers added that the US might struggle to manage financial commitments already tied to tariff agreements. Some foreign governments had negotiated deals with the United States in return for reduced tariff rates. The court ruling now raises questions about the validity of those agreements.
Background of the Legal Challenge
The case began after a series of executive orders in April by President Trump, where he announced tariffs on nearly every country in the world. He described the date as “liberation day” from what he saw as unfair trade practices. Two separate lawsuits were soon filed—one by small businesses and another by a coalition of states.
Trump tariffs hailed as a debt-busting weapon that could slash US deficits by $4 trillion
Earlier in May, the Court of International Trade had already ruled that the tariffs were unlawful. That ruling was paused while the appeals process was underway. The latest decision by the Federal Circuit now confirms that judgment.
The ruling does not take immediate effect. The court delayed enforcement until October 14, giving Trump’s administration time to appeal. This pause means the tariffs remain in place until the next step is taken.
Friday’s ruling also clarifies that the court is not questioning all tariff programs. Only those imposed under the IEEPA were invalidated. Tariffs linked to other trade laws, such as those covering steel and aluminium imports, still stand.
The case is considered highly significant, as it deals with the balance of power between the president and Congress. During President Joe Biden’s tenure, the Supreme Court has also weighed in on limits to presidential authority, applying what it calls the “major questions doctrine” to assess whether broad new policies require explicit congressional approval.