On May 28, 2025, the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT) ruled that the Trump administration’s imposition of tariffs on multiple countries under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) was an overreach of power and illegal, ordering the administration to stop the tariff measures within 10 days. However, the Trump administration filed an appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit just minutes after the ruling and successfully obtained a temporary stay on the implementation of the ruling. On June 3, Judge Conti of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia also suspended the previous “stop order” against the Trump administration’s tariff policy indefinitely until the Court of Appeals makes a decision.
The Dispute Focus: Legal Application and Power Boundaries
The focus of this ruling is the scope of application of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. This law is designed to address “unusual and extraordinary threats” in a state of national emergency, but it does not explicitly authorize the President to impose comprehensive tariffs on global trading partners. The Trump administration, however, argues that the U.S. trade deficit constitutes a “national emergency” and claims that tariffs are a means to address it. However, both the U.S. Court of International Trade and the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia have ruled that the Trump administration’s tariff policy exceeds the scope of authorization under this law.
Political and Economic Impacts: Uncertainty in Trade Policy
The Trump administration’s tariff policy has always been a core part of its trade strategy. This ruling has sparked widespread discussions in the political and economic circles in the United States. On the one hand, White House spokesperson Kush Desai accused the court’s ruling of being a “judicial coup out of control,” arguing that non-elected judges have no right to decide how to deal with a national emergency. On the other hand, those who support the ruling argue that Trump’s tariff policy not only harms the interests of American businesses but also disrupts the global economic order. In addition, Jack Colvin, president of the National Foreign Trade Council, pointed out that the back-and-forth rulings between courts have created uncertainty about the future direction of tariff policies.
The Game Between the Judiciary and the Executive: A Reflection of Checks and Balances
Under the U.S. system of separation of powers, there is an inherent check-and-balance relationship between the judiciary and the executive. The appeal filed by the Trump administration against the ruling to block tariffs is a manifestation of this mechanism. On the one hand, the courts use their rulings to constrain executive power and prevent it from expanding excessively. On the other hand, the executive branch seeks more time and space to maintain the continuity of its policies through appeals. This tug-of-war not only reflects the complexity of the U.S. political system but also highlights the differences and coordination between different power institutions on major policy issues.
Future Outlook: Where Will It Go?
Currently, the Trump administration’s appeal is still ongoing, and the final outcome will depend on the ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit or even the U.S. Supreme Court. If the appellate court upholds the original ruling, the Trump administration will have to re-evaluate its tariff policy and may face dual pressures in both economic and political realms. However, if the appeal is successful, the Trump administration’s tariff policy will continue to be implemented, which will further exacerbate international trade tensions.
No matter what the final outcome is, this incident once again highlights the complexity of the U.S. domestic system of checks and balances and the sensitivity of trade policy. In the context of globalization, U.S. trade policy not only affects its domestic economy but also has a profound impact on the global economic landscape.