Appeals court finds Trump’s sweeping tariffs unconstitutional but leaves them in place for now

Federal Appeals Court Rules Against Trump’s Sweeping Tariffs

By PAUL WISEMAN and LINDSAY WHITEHURST

A federal appeals court delivered a blow to President Donald Trump’s trade policy on Friday, ruling that he had no legal right to impose sweeping tariffs. However, the court allowed his efforts to build a protectionist wall around the American economy to remain in place for now.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit determined that Trump exceeded his authority by declaring national emergencies and imposing import taxes on nearly every country in the world. The decision affirmed a previous ruling by a federal trade court in New York.

While the court’s decision limits Trump’s ability to unilaterally implement tariffs, it also gives his administration the opportunity to appeal to the Supreme Court. The ruling complicates Trump’s trade agenda, which has been characterized by erratic tariff implementation and strained relations with U.S. trading partners.

Trump has used tariffs as a negotiating tool, pressuring countries like the European Union and Japan to agree to trade deals that benefit the United States. The revenue generated from these tariffs has also helped offset the costs of recent tax cuts.

However, the court’s decision could have significant financial implications, potentially requiring the government to refund some of the import taxes collected. The ruling specifically addresses two sets of tariffs imposed by Trump under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act:

• Liberation Day Tariffs: Imposed in April, these tariffs targeted countries with which the U.S. runs trade deficits, as well as a baseline 10% tariff on other nations. The court found that Trump’s use of emergency powers to justify these tariffs exceeded his authority.
• Trafficking Tariffs: Introduced in February on imports from Canada, China, and Mexico, these tariffs aimed to address the flow of drugs and immigrants into the U.S. The court ruled that these tariffs did not meet the requirements set forth by the emergency powers law.

While the ruling represents a setback for Trump’s trade policy, it does not affect other tariffs imposed during his presidency, such as those on steel, aluminum, and autos. Trump may still have alternative authorities to impose import taxes, albeit with more limited scope.

Overall, the court’s decision underscores the ongoing legal challenges surrounding Trump’s trade agenda and the broader implications for U.S. economic policy.

Originally Published: August 29, 2025 at 4:04 PM MDT