President Donald Trump believes any move against his tariffs could be bad for the economy. Trump said on Tuesday that the U.S. faces an “economic disaster” if the Supreme Court does not overturn two lower courts and allow sweeping global tariffs to remain in place.
“If that decision would be lost, it would be an economic disaster for the United States,” Trump said in an interview on “The Scott Jennings Radio Show” on Tuesday. “If we don’t have it, we’re not going to have a country. We’re going to be in very, very serious financial trouble.”
In the same interview, Trump claimed the tariffs were worth an astronomical sum to the United States. “We’re taking in $17 trillion. Every inch of that money is because of tariffs,” Trump said.
READ: Amid tariffs and tensions, new Congressional Study Group on India launched on Capitol Hill (September 3, 2025)
In May, the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT) struck down a large portion of President Donald Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariffs, ruling that the administration overstepped its legal authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). These tariffs, which affected imports from countries like China, Canada, and Mexico, were imposed in early 2025 under claims of national emergencies related to fentanyl trafficking and trade imbalances.
The CIT concluded that IEEPA does not grant the president broad tariff-setting powers and that no genuine emergency justified bypassing Congress. A nationwide injunction was issued, blocking further enforcement of the tariffs. A separate federal case, Learning Resources v. Trump in Washington, D.C., echoed the decision, finding that IEEPA was never intended to authorize the imposition of tariffs—a power reserved for Congress under the Constitution.
On Aug. 29, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld the CIT ruling in a major decision that reinforced limits on executive power. The court ruled 7–4 that President Trump had violated the Constitution’s separation of powers by imposing the tariffs unilaterally. However, it issued a temporary stay, allowing the tariffs to remain in effect until Oct. 14, while the administration seeks review from the U.S. Supreme Court. The ruling invalidated more than 70% of the tariffs imposed under IEEPA, though others issued under different trade laws like Section 301 and 232 were left untouched. The decision drew praise from legal experts and criticism from Trump allies, with some calling it a “judicial overreach” undermining national sovereignty.
U.S. companies may be eligible to claim billions in refunds, though many are holding off amid legal uncertainty. Markets responded cautiously, with analysts warning of increased volatility and economic headwinds. Meanwhile, the Trump administration is exploring alternative legal tools to reassert its trade agenda and maintain pressure on foreign competitors. These rulings mark a significant challenge to Trump’s economic strategy and underscore the courts’ role in limiting presidential overreach, particularly in matters of international trade and emergency powers.
By declaring that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) does not authorize the unilateral imposition of sweeping tariffs, the judiciary has reinforced the constitutional principle that tariff authority lies with Congress. These decisions not only limit the president’s ability to act independently on trade matters but also set a precedent for future administrations.
Economically, the rulings could lead to significant financial implications, including billions in potential refunds for affected companies and uncertainty for global trade partners. Politically, the decisions have intensified partisan divisions, with Trump warning of dire economic consequences if the Supreme Court does not reverse the lower courts. As the case now moves toward possible Supreme Court review, it underscores the critical role of checks and balances in safeguarding democratic governance and regulating presidential authority in economic affairs.