US court blocks Trump’s tariffs, White House decries ruling as undermining executive power

The White House has sharply criticised a federal court ruling that blocks the implementation of President Donald Trump’s sweeping import tariffs, calling it an overreach by the judiciary into matters of national emergency and executive power.

In a unanimous decision delivered on May 28, a three-judge panel of the US Court of International Trade ruled that Trump’s tariffs—most notably the 10 per cent “Liberation Day” levy on all imports—exceeded the authority granted under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), Caliber.Az reports per foreign media.

The ruling also halts earlier tariff orders targeting Canada, Mexico and China, many of which had already been modified or delayed amid market turmoil.

White House spokesman Kush Desai issued a pointed response, defending the administration’s strategy and framing the court’s decision as a challenge to the president’s constitutional role.

“Foreign countries’ nonreciprocal treatment of the United States has fueled America’s historic and persistent trade deficits,” Desai said in a statement. “These deficits have created a national emergency that has decimated American communities, left our workers behind, and weakened our defense industrial base – facts that the court did not dispute.”

“It is not for unelected judges to decide how to properly address a national emergency,” he continued. “President Trump pledged to put America First, and the Administration is committed to using every lever of executive power to address this crisis and restore American Greatness.”

The panel—comprising Judges Timothy Reif (appointed by Trump), Jane Restani (appointed by Ronald Reagan), and Gary Katzmann (appointed by Barack Obama)—rejected the administration’s claim that the issue was a political question and thus not reviewable by the courts.

“This reliance on the political question doctrine is misplaced,” the judges wrote in their opinion.

The ruling stemmed from two separate lawsuits. One, brought by a coalition of small businesses, directly challenged the April 2 “Liberation Day” tariffs. The second, filed by Democratic state attorneys general led by Oregon, took aim at the broader tariff regime instituted under Trump’s executive orders.

The court has given the administration 10 days to issue any administrative orders required to comply with the decision, leaving open the possibility of a continued legal battle over one of the Trump administration’s hallmark trade policies.

By Aghakazim Guliyev