Trump rages at ‘hustler’ judges with his tariff agenda at mercy of the courts

Washington: President Donald Trump’s sweeping worldwide tariffs will remain in place while the government pursues an appeal that will almost certainly be decided by the Supreme Court, with the administration saying it expects America’s trading partners to keep negotiating deals in the meantime.

The Court of International Trade on Thursday struck down a large swath of Trump’s tariffs, finding the president overstepped his legal authority by using emergency powers. Less than 24 hours later, a federal judge in Washington made the same finding in a separate case.

President Donald Trump’s so-called reciprocal tariffs have been ruled unlawful by two separate courts.Credit: Bloomberg

However, on Thursday (Friday AEST) a federal appeals court agreed to temporarily preserve the tariffs – which include a 10 per cent levy on Australian goods – while the appeal is urgently held.

The White House said it expected the matter to be settled by the US Supreme Court, which could receive an appeal as soon as Friday. The government will argue that Trump has the authority to enact the tariffs under his foreign affairs and national security powers.

“The courts should have no role here,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said.

“There is a troubling and dangerous trend of unelected judges inserting themselves into the presidential decision-making process.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt listens during a briefing on Thursday.Credit: AP

“America cannot function if President Trump – or any other president for that matter – has their sensitive diplomatic or trade negotiations railroaded by activist judges. These judges are threatening to undermine the credibility of the United States on the world stage.”

Trump later issued his first public remarks on the initial Court of International Trade ruling – which found the US Constitution gave Congress exclusive authority to regulate commerce with other countries – calling it “wrong” and “political”.

“Hopefully the Supreme Court will reverse this horrible, country-threatening decision QUICKLY and DECISIVELY,” he wrote in a long TruthSocial post late on Thursday night (Friday AEST).

“Backroom ‘hustlers’ must not be allowed to destroy our nation.”

Trump said that if Congress were required to authorise the tariffs, it would require hundreds of politicians to “sit around in [Washington] DC for weeks, and even months, trying to come to a conclusion”.

Leavitt said countries that were yet to strike a trade deal with the US – which includes Australia – should keep negotiating with the Trump administration despite the court ruling.

She said members of the president’s economic team had already been in touch with foreign counterparts to convey this expectation.

“Other countries around the world have faith in the negotiator in chief, President Donald J. Trump,” she said.

“They also probably see how ridiculous this ruling is, and they understand that the administration is going to win, and we intend to win. We expect to fight this battle all the way to the Supreme Court.”

Australian Trade Minister Don Farrell said yesterday that the Albanese government had always believed the tariffs were unjustified and would continue to urge Trump to abandon them altogether.

Trump’s senior trade and manufacturing adviser Peter Navarro, a driving force behind the tariffs, insisted the government would not be derailed, and that it would find a way to make the tariffs stick – possibly using other laws.

He said his trade team had received many phone calls from foreign counterparts expressing a desire to keep negotiating despite the ruling.

“The tariffs remain in place,” Navarro said. “The court told us, ‘Go do it another way’. So you can assume that even if we lose we will do it another way. I can assure the American people that the Trump tariff agenda is alive, well, healthy.”

The Trump administration is fighting legal battles on numerous fronts. A judge in Boston on Thursday extended an injunction against the government barring Harvard University from enrolling international students, while another Massachusetts court blocked Trump from ending a Biden-era humanitarian immigration program.

Stephen Miller, deputy White House chief of staff for policy, made a number of posts on X outlining the Trump administration’s dim view of the legal obstacles it has faced.

“The judicial coup is out of control,” Miller said about the tariff ruling. “We are living under a judicial tyranny,” he added later. Of the immigration decision, he said: “It is the end of democracy if not reversed.”

Trade experts were not surprised by Wednesday’s decision of the Court of International Trade in New York, but the Supreme Court would be the final arbiter.

The levies struck down in the past 24 hours are the so-called “reciprocal tariffs” – including a baseline rate of 10 per cent on Australian goods – which Trump enacted under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). However, the 25 per cent tariffs on steel and aluminium were instituted using different laws, and still stand.

Mary Lovely, a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, said while Trump had other avenues by which he could impose tariffs – particularly section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act – these would be sectoral rather than across-the-board.

“I think that particular ploy is now not available to him,” Lovely said, noting the Supreme Court could allow it. She was not surprised by the court rulings.

“The authority for setting tariffs is very clear in the constitution. The only question was whether the IEEPA was broad enough to include the types of arguments or justifications that he [Trump] used, and the court ruled that it wasn’t.”

Leavitt said on Thursday (AEST) that Trump had a mandate from the American people to fix the US’s large and persistent goods trade deficit, which reached $US1 trillion in 2024 and which she said posed a serious threat to the country’s economy and national security.

“President Trump correctly believes that America cannot function safely long-term if we are unable to scale advanced domestic manufacturing capacity, have our own secure critical supply chains, and [if] our defence industrial base is dependent upon foreign adversaries,” she said.

The case before the Court of International Trade was led by a small Manhattan-based wine importer, VOS Selections, while the Washington case was brought by an Illinois-based toy seller, Learning Resources.

Navarro dismissed the plaintiffs as “a bunch of importers who buy a bunch of cheap subsidised crap from China that really is illegally traded in the sense that it doesn’t abide by the rules of the World Trade Organisation”.

Trump also made his first public remarks on Elon Musk since it was revealed the billionaire Tesla chief executive was leaving the White House after leading a tumultuous government efficiency drive.

While the circumstances of his exit remain unclear, it came shortly after he criticised Trump’s “big, beautiful bill” to cut taxes and lift border security spending, saying it would increase the budget deficit and undermine the work of his Department of Government Efficiency team.

Trump said he and Musk would hold a press conference in the Oval Office early on Saturday AEST.

“This will be his last day, but not really, because he will, always, be with us, helping all the way,” Trump said in a post on Truth Social.

“Elon is terrific!”

With Reuters

Get a note directly from our foreign correspondents on what’s making headlines around the world. Sign up for our weekly What in the World newsletter.