Trump demands the appeals court to temporarily stop U.S. tariff blocks, in the second case

The Trump administration is working to suspend a second court ruling that blocks President Donald Trump’s approval and so-called mutual tariffs, his signature economic policy for his second term.

The administration’s new appeal filed on Monday in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Washington, D.C. Circuit came less than a week after a very similar court challenge held by the U.S. Court of International Trade in New York, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the U.S. Federal Circuit.

In both cases, Trump used the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to formulate his “Liberation Day” tariff plan. The plan announced on April 2 invoked the IEPEA, which he cited 10% baseline tariffs on most U.S. trading partners and so-called “mutual tariffs” to other countries.

Trump’s tariff plan faces an uncertain future as court struggles intensify

Trump unanimously approved Trump’s extensive tariffs on the Emergency Law last Wednesday, which the panel said the regulations did not give Trump “unlimited” power to impose tariffs “unlimited”. However, the United States retained the decision almost immediately The appeals court allowed Trump’s tariffs to continue.

But on the same day, Obama-appointed U.S. District Court Judge Rudolph Contreras determined that Trump was illegal under Ieepa.

Since his previous cases were more limited than what CIT heard – the plaintiffs in the lawsuit focused on the harm to two small businesses, while the harm to the broader tariff plan had barely caused headlines.

But that changed on Monday.

Trump condemns court’s “political” tariff ruling, calling on the Supreme Court to act quickly

A woman under a purple umbrella crossed the Supreme Court in Washington, DC on February 28, 2024 (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin)

The Justice Department’s attorneys demanded that the U.S. Court of Appeals enforce the ruling immediately for the Washington Circuit Court (a single court in Washington state but still a separate court in the federal appeals court).

In their appeal, they argued that the judge’s objection to Trump’s use of the IEPA ruling weakened his ability to use tariffs as a “credible threat” in trade negotiations, which at the time were “at the moment at a delicate junction.”

“By invalidating tariffs, the district court ruling usurped the president’s authority and threatened to undermine sensitive, ongoing negotiations with nearly every trading partner by weakening the premises of these negotiations – tariffs are a credible threat,” Trump’s lawyer said in his application.

Economists also seem to share the view that steep tariffs are more like a negotiation strategy than a proponent of actual policies, they noted in a series of interviews with Fox News Digital last week.

Trump’s tariff plan faces an uncertain future as court struggles intensify

The most important thing about the Trump administration is that they need to go back to a place [where] They are using these huge mutual tariffs, all of which are used as negotiation strategies,” economist William Cline sAn honorary fellow from the Peterson Institute for International Economics said in an interview.

Kline noted that this was a framework previously proposed by Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, who viewed tariffs as the opening ceremony of future trade negotiations, including the United States and China.

President Donald Trump spoke to reporters after David Perdue was sworn in. (AP Photo/Mark Schiefelbein)

“Remember that Trump and Vance have the view that tariffs are beautiful because they will restore the rust belt work in the U.S. and collect funds in doing so, which will help fiscal growth,” said Klein, former deputy managing director and chief economist at the International Finance Institute.

“These are all fantasies.”

What’s going on next remains to be seen. The White House said it would fight the Supreme Court if necessary. The plaintiff’s lawyer responded to this view in an interview with Fox News.

Click here to get the Fox News app

But it is unclear whether the Supreme Court will choose to file a case, a time of increasing pressure on Trump’s relationship with the judiciary.

In 20 weeks since the beginning of his second White House term, Trump administration lawyers have filed 18 urgent appeals to the Superior Court, demonstrating the pace and breadth of the court.