The Trump administration is preparing to ask the U.S. Supreme Court for emergency relief to pause a federal court decision that invalidated President Donald Trump's sweeping tariffs on imports, potentially as early as Friday, according to a Thursday filing in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
The administration warned that without a stay, the ruling would cause "irreparable national-security and economic harms." The filing came after a three-judge panel on the U.S. Court of International Trade ruled Wednesday night that the White House had overstepped its emergency authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), striking down dozens of country-specific tariffs introduced under Trump's "liberation day" trade policy in April.
The judges-Jane Restani, Timothy Reif, and Gary Katzmann, appointed respectively by Presidents Reagan, Obama, and Trump-concluded that the IEEPA does not "confer such unbounded authority" to presidents. Their decision imposes a permanent, nationwide injunction on the tariffs and bars any future modifications. The court gave the administration 10 days to comply.
Trump's aides launched a full-scale attack on the ruling, with White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller declaring, "We are living under a judicial tyranny." Trump trade advisor Peter Navarro called the court "globalist" and "pro-importer," and accused it of undermining American sovereignty. "There is all sorts of things we can do well within the law," Navarro said on Thursday.
The Department of Justice simultaneously filed a request for the trade court to delay the enforcement of its ruling while an appeal is underway. DOJ attorney Sosun Bae cited warnings from Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer, and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, who argued the ruling could unravel a fragile preliminary agreement with China and jeopardize further negotiations.
Trump has staked much of his economic agenda on tariffs, using them to extract leverage in trade talks while also pushing for lower taxes and increased military spending. Despite the court ruling, his team suggested alternative legal pathways remain. Goldman Sachs economists cited three possible avenues: Sections 301 and 122 of the 1974 Trade Act and Section 338 of the 1930 Trade Act.
Section 301 permits retaliatory tariffs for unfair trade practices after investigations, and Section 232 allows tariffs tied to national security, which Trump previously applied to steel and aluminum. Section 122 offers the broadest authority, enabling the president to impose tariffs up to 15% for 150 days without formal review.
Still, these tools involve more bureaucratic steps, limiting Trump's preference for rapid, unilateral action. "The trade shock may be less severe, but trade uncertainty may be prolonged," said Krishna Guha of Evercore ISI. Businesses, especially those reliant on industrial imports, face a protracted period of volatility as the legal battle continues.
