Trump appeals to the Supreme Court to preserve his sweeping tariffs
Source: NBC News
Sept. 3, 2025, 10:10 PM EDT
WASHINGTON The Trump administration asked the Supreme Court on Wednesday to quickly decide whether he has the power to impose broad tariffs under a law designed for use during times of emergency.
The Justice Department is appealing a ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Friday that President Donald Trump had exceeded his authority, the filings said. The filings, shared by the Justice Department and the challengers, have not yet been officially docketed by the Supreme Court.
Jeffrey Schwab, a lawyer for the Liberty Justice Center which is representing businesses challenging the tariffs said in a statement he was confident the court would rule against Trump.
These unlawful tariffs are inflicting serious harm on small businesses and jeopardizing their survival. We hope for a prompt resolution of this case for our clients, he added.
Read more: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/trump-asks-supreme-court-endorse-power-impose-broad-tariffs-rcna228799
REFERENCES
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143520820
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143521038

Doodley
(11,364 posts)If the Supreme Court backs Trump, tariffs continue and the country will go into recession. Trump's approval will be in the gutter.
If they don't, Trump, the guy who has put on the strongman act for the whole world, using the threat of tariffs to bully world leaders and gaslight Americans will be utterly humiliated. It will be like the school bully being chastised by the teacher. He will look even more of a clown. As we know, everything is about Trump and the way he feels. He will never get over it.
J_William_Ryan
(3,000 posts)A moronic, monumental waste of time and money to preserve something both pointless and harmful.
GreenWave
(11,573 posts)JohnnyRingo
(20,160 posts)There is absolutely nothing about Trump that can be called appealing. haha
LetMyPeopleVote
(169,765 posts)We could learn next week whether the justices will agree to hear the momentous case and whether they will do so on an expedited basis.
Link to tweet
https://www.msnbc.com/deadline-white-house/deadline-legal-blog/supreme-court-tariffs-trump-appeal-rcna229021
If the high court adheres to the proposed speedy schedule, then the justices will decide by Sept. 10 whether to take the case. (That would be moving very fast by high court standards.) On the expedited timeline, the parties would submit their briefs ahead of a hearing the first week in November. The justices wouldnt be on a deadline to rule after that (they usually decide the terms cases by July); although if they agree to expedited consideration, then their ruling on tariffs could come much sooner.
Whenever it would come, such a ruling carries great implications for the economy and executive power during a presidential term in which the Roberts Court has already granted Trump expansive powers.
A divided appeals court ruled against the administration in the tariffs case last week but put its ruling on hold until mid-October to allow time to appeal. The administration isnt waiting for the deadline to run out, writing in its motion to expedite that the appellate ruling has disrupted highly impactful, sensitive, ongoing diplomatic trade negotiations, and cast a pall of legal uncertainty over the Presidents efforts to protect our country by preventing an unprecedented economic and foreign-policy crisis.
Whether or not the justices agree to expedited review, taking the case would add another momentous dispute to a term already stocked with important appeals on voting rights, campaign finance and more. The term starts Oct. 6 and the justices have already published their hearing calendars for October and November, but they can add cases to their docket and calendar however they like.
republianmushroom
(21,371 posts)Bayard
(26,974 posts)Anyone?
Tumbulu
(6,585 posts)and will this confirm that the united part of the states is no more as the rule of law is gone, that is if and only if it is a Republican breaking it.
Response to BumRushDaShow (Original post)
Bayard This message was self-deleted by its author.