Washington: US President Donald Trump has formally requested the U.S. Supreme Court to intervene in a high-stakes legal battle to preserve his administration’s controversial emergency tariffs. The tariffs, initially imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), were recently struck down by a federal appeals court, which ruled that the law does not authorize the sweeping trade measures enacted by Trump. Despite this setback, the tariffs remain in effect until mid-October as the administration seeks a Supreme Court review.
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent highlighted national security concerns, particularly the ongoing fentanyl crisis, as justification for maintaining the tariffs. “These measures are vital for protecting American interests,” he stated, signaling the administration’s determination to uphold the policy despite mounting legal challenges. The government is also exploring alternative legal avenues to sustain the tariffs, including invoking provisions of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act.
Legal experts caution that the Supreme Court faces a complex decision. While the Court’s conservative majority might favor executive authority, the “major questions” doctrine which restricts expansive executive action on significant policy matters not explicitly authorized by Congress poses a considerable challenge. The case is expected to define the limits of presidential power in trade policy, making its outcome crucial for both legal precedent and economic policy.
The stakes are substantial. Should the Supreme Court uphold the appeals court ruling, the administration could face the daunting task of refunding approximately $65.8 billion in tariffs already collected. Meanwhile, markets have reacted nervously, with heightened volatility in stock indexes and fluctuations in Treasury yields, reflecting investor concern over prolonged uncertainty in trade policy.
As legal proceedings continue, the case has become a flashpoint in national debates over the scope of executive power and trade strategy. Analysts note that the resolution will have far-reaching implications for U.S. international trade relations, economic stability, and the precedent for future presidential authority in enforcing emergency measures. A Supreme Court decision is anticipated by early 2026, with both legal experts and market watchers keeping a close eye on developments.