Former President Donald Trump has filed an appeal of that decision of the federal court. Not only did this ruling make his unilateral, across-the-board tariffs illegal, the potential implications for our national economy are enormous. The Supreme Court will likely act on just such a case as early as this fall. This comes on the heels of Trump’s April tariffs, similarly referred to by Trump as “Liberation Day” tariffs.
In that appeal, Trump is trying to persuade the Supreme Court not just to hear his case, but to strike down the appellate court’s ruling. He seeks to reacquire his tariffs that have been criticized for exacerbating U.S. inflation and compromising U.S. GDP growth. The tariffs have become broad-based import taxes on everything from furniture to cars, coffee to electronics. Critics claim that these taxes aggravate economic woes.
In this legal battle, Trump has called on a national emergency. He points to the U.S. trade deficit and retaliatory tariffs placed on American exports by other nations as immediate dangers to the American economy. Unlike many other such tools, the Emergency Act does not explicitly authorize tariffs as one of the tools to address emergency trade problems.
At the time, Trump called the announcement of these tariffs an act of true patriotism to strengthen the U.S. economy. Yet, the reality reflects a different picture. Many economic experts—including the Administration’s own Council of Economic Advisors—have argued that these tariffs have directly caused increased inflation and undermined economic growth. Before their implementation, the U.S. economy was enjoying strong GDP growth, a 50-year low in unemployment, and falling inflation.
When an appeals court ruled Trump’s tariffs unconstitutional, his administration had to scramble to get the Supreme Court to take up the case. Historically, the Supreme Court has granted Trump’s administration requests 18 times in a row, often vacating injunctions placed by lower courts. This disturbing pattern goes to the heart of the independence of the judiciary and its ties to a former president.
Trump has reiterated his belief that a ruling against his tariffs would lead to dire consequences for the United States. He stated, “If allowed to stand, this Decision [would literally destroy the United States of America].” He ominously cautioned that this decision could lead the country to becoming “like a Third World Nation.” The consequences of such a move would be dire and reckless.
This legal fight is a manifestation of more macroeconomic worries that are related to Trump’s policies. For example, critics say that aside from exacerbating inflation across the board, his senseless tariffs have taken a hammer to international relations. Economic analysts predict that a court ruling blocking these tariffs could prevent further inflationary pressure and support sustainable economic growth.
Notably, Trump’s administration has repeatedly aligned itself with the Supreme Court’s conservative majority, which many perceive as being supportive of Trump’s agenda. The Court has provisionally allowed Trump to take actions such as firing the chair of the National Labor Relations Board, significantly altering federal education policies, and accessing sensitive social security information for millions of Americans.
The stakes are high as Trump, now facing unprecedented economic criticism, attempts to double down on his tariff policies. His administration is having a hard time explaining how such actions would be legal and/or effective. Together, rising inflation and other important economic indicators are complicating the picture, weighing down upon already strained communities.