US Court Rules Many Of Trump's Global Tariffs Unlawful

U.S. Appeals Court Rules Against Trump’s Tariffs

In a major blow to Donald Trump’s trade strategy, a divided U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled on Friday that most of the former president’s tariffs are illegal. The 7-4 decision undercuts one of Trump’s signature economic policy tools, while leaving the tariffs in place until October 14 to allow the administration to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.

The ruling strikes at the core of Trump’s second-term agenda, which has heavily relied on tariffs to pressure foreign governments, renegotiate trade deals, and address U.S. trade deficits.

Court Questions Trump’s Use of Emergency Powers

At issue was Trump’s reliance on the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), a 1977 law traditionally used for sanctions and asset freezes against enemies of the United States. Trump was the first president to invoke IEEPA to justify tariffs, declaring a national emergency over trade deficits and fentanyl trafficking.

The court disagreed, stating:

“The statute bestows significant authority on the President… but none of these actions explicitly include the power to impose tariffs, duties, or the like, or the power to tax.”

Political and Market Reactions

Trump denounced the ruling as the work of a “highly partisan court” but predicted the Supreme Court would reverse it, insisting that tariffs remain essential to protecting U.S. jobs and manufacturing.

Markets reacted cautiously, with analysts warning that the decision could heighten trade uncertainty.

“The last thing the market or corporate America needs is more uncertainty on trade,” said Art Hogan, chief strategist at B. Riley Wealth.

What’s Next: Supreme Court Showdown

Legal experts expect Trump’s team to invoke other statutes to keep tariffs in place, but the broader question of presidential authority over trade now appears destined for the Supreme Court.

With Trump also battling over the independence of the Federal Reserve, analysts say his entire economic agenda could be on a collision course with the nation’s highest court.