Trump says US would be on 'brink of economic catastrophe' unless
justices rule his tariffs are legal
[September 05, 2025] By
LINDSAY WHITEHURST and MARK SHERMAN
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump is seeking a swift and
definitive decision on tariffs from the Supreme Court that he helped
shape, saying the country would be on “the brink of economic
catastrophe” without the import taxes he has imposed on U.S. rivals and
allies alike.
The administration used near-apocalyptic terms that are highly unusual
in Supreme Court filings as it asked the justices late Wednesday to
intervene and reverse an appeals court ruling that found most of Trump’s
tariffs are an illegal use of an emergency powers law. The tariffs
remain in place, for now.
The case comes to a court that has so far been reluctant to check
Trump’s extraordinary flex of executive power. One big question is
whether the justices' own expansive view of presidential authority
allows for Trump's tariffs without the explicit approval of Congress,
which the Constitution endows with the power over tariffs. Three of the
justices on conservative-majority court were nominated by Trump in his
first term.
The tariffs and their erratic rollout have shaken global markets,
alienated U.S. trading partners and allies, and raised fears of higher
prices and slower economic growth.
But the Republican president has also used the trade penalties to
pressure the European Union, Japan and others into accepting new deals.
Revenue from tariffs totaled $159 billion by late August, more than
double what it was at the same point a year earlier.
Raising the stakes even higher, Solicitor General D. John Sauer urged
the Supreme Court to decide in a week's time whether to hear the case
and hold arguments the first week of November. That is far faster than
the pace of the typical Supreme Court case.
“The President and his Cabinet officials have determined that the
tariffs are promoting peace and unprecedented economic prosperity, and
that the denial of tariff authority would expose our nation to trade
retaliation without effective defenses and thrust America back to the
brink of economic catastrophe,” Sauer wrote.
He wrote that it is not just trade that is at issue, but also the
nation's ability to reduce the flow of fentanyl and efforts to end
Russia's war against Ukraine.
The tariffs will almost certainly remain in effect until a final ruling
from the Supreme Court. But the Republican administration nevertheless
called on the high court to intervene quickly and reverse the ruling
from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
“That decision casts a pall of uncertainty upon ongoing foreign
negotiations that the President has been pursuing through tariffs over
the past five months, jeopardizing both already negotiated framework
deals and ongoing negotiations,” Sauer wrote. “The stakes in this case
could not be higher.”
The filing cites not only Trump but also the secretaries of the
departments of Treasury, Commerce and State in support of the urgent
need for the justices to step in.
“The recent decision by the Federal Circuit is already adversely
affecting ongoing negotiations,” Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent wrote.
[to top of second column] |
The Supreme Court Building is seen in Washington on March 28, 2017.
(AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite, File)
 The stakes are also high for small
businesses battered by tariffs and uncertainty, said Jeffrey Schwab,
senior counsel and director of litigation at the Liberty Justice
Center.
“These unlawful tariffs are inflicting serious harm on small
businesses and jeopardizing their survival. We hope for a prompt
resolution of this case for our clients,” he said.
The businesses have twice prevailed, once at a federal court focused
on trade and again with the appeals court's 7-4 ruling. Their
lawsuit is one of several challenging the tariffs.
Most judges on the Federal Circuit found that the 1977 International
Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA, does not allow Trump to
usurp congressional power to set tariffs. The dissenters, though,
said the gives the president the power to regulate importation
during emergencies without explicit limitations.
The ruling involves two sets of import taxes, both of which Trump
justified by declaring a national emergency: the tariffs first
announced in April and the ones from February on imports from
Canada, China and Mexico.
The Constitution gives Congress the power to impose taxes, including
tariffs. But over the decades, lawmakers have ceded authority to the
president, and Trump has made the most of the power vacuum.
Some Trump tariffs, including levies on foreign steel, aluminum and
autos, were not covered by the appeals court ruling. It also does
not include tariffs Trump imposed on China in his first term that
were kept by Democratic President Joe Biden.
Trump can impose tariffs under other laws, but those have more
limitations on the speed and severity with which he could act.
The government has argued that if the tariffs are struck down, it
might have to refund some of the import taxes that it’s collected,
delivering a financial blow to the U.S. Treasury.
The tariffs are expected to reduce deficits by $4 trillion over the
next 10 years, the administration said, citing analyses by the
Congressional Budget Office.
In an analysis from June, the CBO also found that the import taxes
would slow growth and increase price pressures. The June analysis
estimated that inflation would be 0.4% higher annually in 2025 and
2026 than it otherwise would be, hurting the purchasing power of
U.S. consumers and businesses.
Trump has since revised and changed his tariff structure, making
some of the estimates speculative.
Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell warned in an August speech that
tariffs are already pushing up the prices of some goods, but “there
is significant uncertainty about where all of these polices will
eventually settle and what their lasting effects on the economy will
be.”
___
Associated Press writer Josh Boak contributed to this report.
All contents © copyright 2025 Associated Press. All rights reserved |
