A panel of judges on the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Thursday voiced sharp skepticism over President Donald Trump’s sweeping use of emergency powers to impose tariffs on countries. The hearing comes as Trump races against a self-imposed August 1 deadline to finalise reciprocal trade deals before dozens of tariffs are set to resume.
At the heart of the case is whether Trump overstepped his authority by invoking the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to justify a wide-ranging tariff regime aimed at tackling trade imbalances and combating fentanyl trafficking.
“The law itself never mentions the word ‘tariffs’,” one judge observed early in the hearing, calling the justification a potential “death knell of the Constitution” if allowed to stand.
Businesses and States push back
The challenge to Trump’s authority has been brought by a coalition of small businesses and state attorneys general. They argue that the tariffs, first enacted in April under the so-called “Liberation Day” policy, have disrupted markets and were not grounded in any legally defined emergency.
“The President’s chaotic assertion of that purported authority, which changed by the day and wreaked havoc on capital markets and the economy, illustrates both the breadth of powers that the President claims and the danger of unlimited authority in this domain,” the coalition stated in its legal brief.
Trump: Tariffs are critical to US survival
In a message posted on his social media platform Thursday morning, Trump framed the court case as pivotal to the nation’s economic future.
“To all of my great lawyers who have fought so hard to save our Country, good luck in America’s big case today,” Trump wrote.
“If our Country was not able to protect itself by using TARIFFS AGAINST TARIFFS, WE WOULD BE ‘DEAD,’ WITH NO CHANCE OF SURVIVAL OR SUCCESS.”
The Trump administration has maintained that its tariff actions are necessary to counteract “grave threats to the United States’ national security and economy,” including the country’s ballooning trade deficit and the fentanyl crisis.
Previous ruling casts legal doubt
Thursday’s arguments come after a May ruling by the US Court of International Trade, which concluded that Trump lacked the authority to impose the tariffs unilaterally under IEEPA. That decision questioned whether the administration had met the legal standard of demonstrating an “unusual and extraordinary threat.”
The appeals court stayed that ruling, allowing the tariffs to remain in effect while the case is reviewed. The outcome could significantly impact both Trump’s trade policy legacy and future presidential authority in using emergency powers to shape foreign economic relations.
DOJ: Court ruling would harm US interests
The Department of Justice, defending Trump’s actions, warned of far-reaching consequences if the court invalidates the tariffs. DOJ attorneys argued that doing so would “deprive the United States of a powerful tool for combating systemic distortions in the global trading system.”
They further emphasized the urgency of the situation: “President Trump has found that America’s exploding trade deficit, the implications of that deficit for our economy and national security, and a fentanyl importation crisis that has claimed thousands of American lives constitute national emergencies.”